" Throughout the United States, the conflict between freedom of speech and internet safety is rapidly becoming more prevalent. As tragic cases of cyberbullying, like that of Amanda Todd, rise to the headlines of American newspapers, and centers of crime like the infamous drug website, the Silk Road, cause mayhem, governing bodies across every level of government seek a solution. The government is rapidly being forced to decide whether it must increase control, or let things continue as they will. But higher government control has the very real possibility of destroying free speech as we know it, and in the process, destroying the ethics that our founding fathers held so high. This pressing problem is visible in the trial of Michelle Carter, …show more content…
Carter’s case was complex enough, cyberbullying is a whole different ball game. In June 10th of 2016, the Supreme Court of North Carolina removed a state law against cyberbullying due to the ramifications it led to in respect to the Constitution. The problem was that cyberbullying is a word with an unclear definition. In essence, it means saying or doing something online that could hurt someone else. Unfortunately, something as simple as disagreeing with someone else on a political matter could be construed as cyberbullying. A law against it, as Vanessa Miller and Mary Zoeller note in a FIRE article on the decision, “can be used by administrators to censor unwanted speech.” The fact that a decision against cyberbullying could be a state law, as opposed to just a ruling on a particular internet forum, makes the fact that the law was passed deeply disturbing. The mayhem that might ensue if a state particularly biased towards a political party passed a law like that is catastrophic on many …show more content…
Unfortunately, many of those issues involve a conflict between internet rights and the first Amendment. Many laws involving the internet only complicate the issue. Government control of the internet is undesirable at almost all levels. Freedom, whatever the cost, is essential to the republic that is the United States of America, and unfortunately laws against internet use destroy that freedom. Due to that, they must not be