Regardless of if they were a class at the time they're a class now, because your interpretation is not one that is actually used. And they've been screwing with this country since Hearst or even earlier, more than a century.
What Supreme Court precedent treated "the press" as a class? Name the case. Not how the current administration treats them, or how social media companies treat them, actual precedent that says I'm wrong.
Here's a hint, you can't. In fact, the Trump administration kicked certain pressies out of the conferences. No special treatment there right?
Regardless of if they were a class at the time they're a class now, because your interpretation is not one that is actually used. And they've been screwing with this country since Hearst or even earlier, more than a century.
Except it is the interpretation used you buffoon. SCOTUS constantly interprets "the press" as an act and not a group of people.
Stop thinking that authoritarianism can be solved with more authoritarianism that benefits you in the short term you weirdo.
You must've lived in a cave for the last two decades then.
What Supreme Court precedent treated "the press" as a class? Name the case. Not how the current administration treats them, or how social media companies treat them, actual precedent that says I'm wrong.
Here's a hint, you can't. In fact, the Trump administration kicked certain pressies out of the conferences. No special treatment there right?
When did I say that? I've pointed out that it's codified in roughly half the country and in numerous federal district courts.
The supreme cucks are a whole other problem right along with the press, and they'll be dealt with the same way.