Claims of election interference could actually harm online free speech more. ACB's hearings told us a lot about partisanship.

View in browser ([link removed] )

October 19, 2020

Supreme-Court-Law-600-light ([link removed] )

SCOTUS Hearings Highlight Party Differences on Rule of Law ([link removed] )

With the two parties adopting incompatible judicial philosophies, it’s impossible to find an “uncontroversial” nominee.

- Amy Coney Barrett Hearings Shine a Light on the Difference Between the Two Parties ([link removed] )

By Ilya Shapiro

Social Media on Phone ([link removed] )

Accusations of Election Interference Put Online Free Speech at Risk ([link removed] )

Twitter and Facebook have not interfered in the election by restricting access to certain articles, but claims that they have may damage the future integrity of freedom of speech on social media.

- Accusations of Social Media "Election Interference" Put Online Speech at Risk ([link removed] )

By Matthew Feeney

FEATURED ARTICLES

Grading Trump’s Economic Policies ([link removed] )

With only three weeks until the big presidential election, now’s as good a time as any to grade President Trump’s economic policy during his first term.

Read More ([link removed] )

DOL Said Its H-1B Wage Rule Should Cost Many Employers $0 But It Imposed Billions in Costs Anyway ([link removed] )

This is the second way in which DOL has fundamentally misrepresented its rule to the public.

Read More ([link removed] )

Opioid Policymakers Keep Tilting at Windmills, Striking Patients in the Process ([link removed] )

Policymakers refuse to acknowledge the true cause of the overdose crisis.

Read More ([link removed] )

Sign Up For Other Cato Newsletters
([link removed] )

SUPPORT CATO
([link removed] )

Facebook ([link removed] )

LinkedIn ([link removed] )

Twitter ([link removed] )

Instagram ([link removed] )

YouTube ([link removed] )

Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20001, (202) 842-0200

Manage preferences ([link removed] )