IANAl but my understanding is that the current lines are drawn at active collaboration or directed communications to a designated foreign terrorist organization. I don't know whether this means that Brandenburg v. Ohio would come out differently today (remember, Brandenburg was accused of advocating terrorism at a domestic terrorist organization's meetings-- the domestic terrorism organization being the KKK, and yes the word terrorism occurred in the statute).
Under lines drawn in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project you can blog all day and night about how groups like Hamas could adopt nonviolent means of resistance and be more successful, but if you directly talk to Hamas and make such a recommendation, then the court has declined to say that is protected.
Worse, there is reason to think that is not protected. In Citizens United v. FEC the court said that independent expenditures were protected and corporations had a right to speak on election issues, but that speech coordinated in any way with candidates was not protected, because that makes it into a gift in kind that has the same effect, in essence, of a bribe. The idea that Citizens United and Holder v. HLP draw this funny line at who you talk to vs what you say strikes me as dangerous.
But at least it isn't hard for the EFF to stay on the right side of that line.
Under lines drawn in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project you can blog all day and night about how groups like Hamas could adopt nonviolent means of resistance and be more successful, but if you directly talk to Hamas and make such a recommendation, then the court has declined to say that is protected.
Worse, there is reason to think that is not protected. In Citizens United v. FEC the court said that independent expenditures were protected and corporations had a right to speak on election issues, but that speech coordinated in any way with candidates was not protected, because that makes it into a gift in kind that has the same effect, in essence, of a bribe. The idea that Citizens United and Holder v. HLP draw this funny line at who you talk to vs what you say strikes me as dangerous.
But at least it isn't hard for the EFF to stay on the right side of that line.