Aggregator

情報通信行政・郵政行政審議会　郵政行政分科会（第101回）配布資料・議事概要・議事録

第332回官民競争入札等監理委員会（会議資料）

情報通信審議会 情報通信技術分科会 航空・海上無線通信委員会 AMRD作業班（第3回）

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会　IPネットワーク設備委員会非常時における事業者間ローミング等に関する検討作業班（第7回）配布資料

弾道ミサイルを想定した住民避難訓練の実施

「第72回文化財防火デー」の実施

政党助成法に基づく政党の届出（令和8年1月1日現在）の概要

独立行政法人郵便貯金簡易生命保険管理・郵便局ネットワーク支援機構法に基づく交付金の額　及び交付方法の認可並びに拠出金の額及び徴収方法の認可

地方公共団体情報システムの標準化に関する法律第二条第一項に規定する標準化対象事務を定める政令に規定するデジタル庁令・総務省令で定める事務を定める命令第六条各号に規定する事務の処理に係るシステムに必要とされる機能等に関する標準化基準を定める省令（案）等に対する意見募集

情報通信審議会　電気通信事業政策部会　固定電話サービス移行円滑化委員会（第5回）

地方公共団体情報システムの標準化に関する法律第二条第一項に規定する標準化対象事務を定める政令に規定するデジタル庁令・総務省令で定める事務を定める命令第三条各号に規定する事務の処理に係るシステムに必要とされる機能等に関する標準化基準を定める省令（案）等に対する意見募集

ふるさと住民登録制度モデル事業に係る対象自治体の募集

第34次地方制度調査会第1回総会

衆議院比例代表選出議員の選挙における衆議院名簿届出予定政党等に対する事前説明会

第9回「インフラメンテナンス大賞」の受賞者の決定及び表彰式の開催

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会　電波有効利用委員会（第10回）

　ノンフィクション･ジャンルからチョイスした本の紹介です(刊行順･販価は税別)◆松場登美『とみとふく━76歳、古民家ひとり暮らしの登美さんと、保護犬フレンチブルドッグ福の幸せな日々』 小学館 1/8刊 1700円数年前に後進に道を譲り、ひとり暮らしの登美さん。娘の由紀子さんがペットとの暮らしを提案。やってきたのは保護犬で、ちょっぴり不細工な女の子のフレンチブルドッグ。「福」と名付けたその子が登美さんの古民家にきたその日から、登美さんの第二の人生が輝きはじめた!　著者は1949..

　東電・柏崎刈羽原発が再稼働する。　新潟県民の賛否は半々なのに花角知事が容認した。背後には無責任な国の姿勢の逆転がある。昨年の女川に次ぐ認可だ。柏崎を待っていたかのように鈴木北海道知事も泊・再稼働を認めた。　２０１１年の福島原発事故以来、政府は「原発の利用を減らしてゆく」と言い続けた。それが突如「原発を活用する」に変わった。「安全性は政府と規制委が認めた」と言う。その一方、事故に備えて住民避難路は作る。雪の新潟。事故は道路も見えない猛吹雪の時や、深夜に起きるかもしれない。２０..

Government invasion of a reporter’s home, and seizure of journalistic materials, is exactly the kind of abuse of power the First Amendment is designed to prevent. It represents the most extreme form of press intimidation. 

Yet, that’s what happened on Wednesday morning to Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson, when the FBI searched her Virginia home and took her phone, two laptops, and a Garmin watch. 

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has joined 30 other press freedom and civil liberties organizations in condemning the FBI’s actions against Natanson. The First Amendment exists precisely to prevent the government from using its powers to punish or deter reporting on matters of public interest—including coverage of leaked or sensitive information. Searches like this threaten not only journalists, but the public’s right to know what its government is doing.

In the statement published yesterday, we call on Congress: 

To exercise oversight of the DOJ by calling Attorney General Pam Bondi before Congress to answer questions about the FBI’s actions; 

To reintroduce and pass the PRESS Act, which would limit government surveillance of journalists, and its ability to compel journalists to reveal sources; 

To reform the 108-year-old Espionage Act so it can no longer be used to intimidate and attack journalists. 

And to pass a resolution confirming that the recording of law enforcement activity is protected by the First Amendment. 

We’re joined on this letter by Free Press Action, the American Civil Liberties Union, PEN America, the NewsGuild-CWA, the Society of Professional Journalists, the Committee to Protect Journalists, and many other press freedom and civil liberties groups.

Further Reading:

•   Joint Statement of Press Freedom Groups Condemning FBI Actions

EFF asked a California appeals court to uphold a lower court’s decision to strike a tech CEO’s lawsuit against a journalist that sought to silence reporting the CEO, Maury Blackman, didn’t like.

The journalist, Jack Poulson, reported on Maury Blackman’s arrest for felony domestic violence after receiving a copy of the arrest report from a confidential source. Blackman didn’t like that. So, he sued Poulson—along with Substack, Amazon Web Services, and Poulson’s non-profit, Tech Inquiry—to try and force Poulson to take his articles down from the internet.

Fortunately, the trial court saw this case for what it was: a classic SLAPP, or a strategic lawsuit against public participation. The court dismissed the entire complaint under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which provides a way for defendants to swiftly defeat baseless claims designed to chill their free speech.

The appeals court should affirm the trial court’s correct decision.  

Poulson’s reporting is just the kind of activity that the state’s anti-SLAPP law was designed to protect: truthful speech about a matter of public interest. The felony domestic violence arrest of the CEO of a controversial surveillance company with U.S. military contracts is undoubtedly a matter of public interest. As we explained to the court, “the public has a clear interest in knowing about the people their government is doing business with.”

Blackman’s claims are totally meritless, because they are barred by the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects Poulson’s right to publish and report on the incident report. Blackman argues that a court order sealing the arrest overrides Poulson’s right to report the news—despite decades of Supreme Court and California Court of Appeals precedent to the contrary. The trial correctly rejected this argument and found that the First Amendment defeats all of Blackman’s claims. As the trial court explained, “the First Amendment’s protections for the publication of truthful speech concerning matters of public interest vitiate Blackman’s merits showing.”

The court of appeals should reach the same conclusion.

Related Cases: Blackman v. Substack, et al.