So, I'd thought the conversations around SB8's "chilling effect" on abortion providers was merely a vernacular expression, not a legal one. E.g.
https://reason.com/volokh/2021/11/02/limiting-principles-and-sb8/ But it looks to this non-lawyer like anti-SLAPP laws, explicitly punishing law-gaming, targets a "chilling effect" directly. E.g. https://theintercept.com/2021/11/10/proud-boys-antifascist-tweet-chad-loder-court/ Chilling free speech, which is an explicit right, has a different status than chilling abortion, which is only a derived right. But that chilling is explicitly considered at all. It evokes, for me, some sophisticated ethical considerations around scalable relations, from interpersonal up to corporate policies up to constitutional law ... maybe even down to eusocial genetics. That a bureaucratic technology might be a mechanism for navigating/scaling persnickety ethical issues is pretty interesting. -- "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie." ☤>$ uǝlƃ .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
