How is it possible that “dirty tricks” intending to dupe the American public to tilt elections — traced back to campaign operatives — are considered legal? Does the 1st Amendment go so far as to cover the deliberate defrauding of the voters with a whopper capable of “nudging” the outcome?
What would James Madison say? When he coined the phrase “the consent of the governed”, wasn’t he talking about informed consent? If instead, consent is obtained through trickery and deceit, what remains of his principle?
Based on this reasoning, it will improve our campaigns to develop new tort law empowering The Public (as plaintiff) to sue any actor(s) who pushes out a Public Fraud for political gain. You can think of this as an extension of Defamation Law, where issues of fact vs. fabrication are decided by a jury, and liability consequences levied for those committing the latter. The Alex Jones, Dominion and E Jean Carroll lawsuits show the potential to deter deceitful infowarfare in keeping with 1st Amendment freedoms.
Public Frauds Courts would be designed for Rapid-Rssponse, so that defendants could not employ process delays to give duration to their lies.
Considering the many public deceptions that litter our recent political history — and the addition of deep-fakes in 2024 — let’s attack the problem broadly with a Public Frauds Deterrence Act of 2023. Let Congressman Swalwell know you support this way of upping the consequences for political dirty tricks.
Pierre Bierre
Pleasanton CA
