The U.S. FTC isn't backing down—they're still digging into alleged advertising boycotts targeting conservative websites. A federal judge already ruled on this case last year, determining it amounts to retaliation against an advocacy group for exercising their First Amendment rights. The ongoing probe raises interesting questions about how regulatory bodies handle disputes involving speech and platform economics. For those tracking regulatory trends, this development is worth understanding, especially as it touches on how market participants navigate increasingly complex compliance environments.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
8 Likes
Reward
8
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
RugpullSurvivor
· 1h ago
LOL FTC is really bored, still investigating after the verdict? Freedom of speech is becoming more and more complicated.
View OriginalReply0
PonziWhisperer
· 01-23 09:43
ngl this FTC is a bit hard to handle, the judge has already ruled but it's still standing there...
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedAgain
· 01-23 09:43
Once again, I got caught by the FTC's risk control measures. These regulatory agencies really don't play by the rules. The judge has already made a ruling, yet they keep messing around. Instead of arguing over freedom of speech, it might be better to see when the liquidation mechanism loosens...
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-1a2ed0b9
· 01-23 09:41
Coming back with this again? FTC just wants to find an excuse to hassle people.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeNightmare
· 01-23 09:40
Coming back again? The judge has already ruled, and they still want to investigate. The FTC really has too much free time.
The U.S. FTC isn't backing down—they're still digging into alleged advertising boycotts targeting conservative websites. A federal judge already ruled on this case last year, determining it amounts to retaliation against an advocacy group for exercising their First Amendment rights. The ongoing probe raises interesting questions about how regulatory bodies handle disputes involving speech and platform economics. For those tracking regulatory trends, this development is worth understanding, especially as it touches on how market participants navigate increasingly complex compliance environments.