Re: SPECIAL REPORT: Censorware in the Stacks

[berezina@qed.net (Paul Spirito)]

On Mon, 22 Dec 1997 10:04:47 -0800, David Honig wrote:

>
>Note that if the library in question were not arm of the State,
>noone would have any First Amendment claim.
>
>This is reminiscent of TM's recent (controversial) analysis of the fired
>county trashworker/author,
>and suggests a clearer example of the confusion caused by State as Employer:

It's true that in the absence of public libraries this would not be an
issue; however, it is an example of the state acting as sovereign, not
employer. We're concerned with the right of patrons to access material, &
they are not state employees. The situation is analogous to a public park:
just because the state owns it, does that mean it can forbid, say, criticism
of the state in it? No, of course not, though it has broader discretion in
limiting the speech of public employees in the park, while on-duty.

Paul

"(pun intended, though unfunny)"

~Saint