Episode 204: What Could Have Been for the Bill S-210 Hearings

episode

Law Bytes not yet transcribed

▲ 0

Transcript

This episode hasn't been transcribed yet Upvotes decide what gets transcribed next — 0 so far. Sign in to upvote

Related

recent transcribed audio

Your partner wants profit. You want freedom. Now what? 22 min · 16 Sep 2026 · The Optometry Success Podcast

Board of County Supervisors Meeting - Work Session - Sep 15, 2026 3h 17m · 15 Sep 2026 · Prince William County Board of Supervisors

Finance and Budget Committee - Sep 15, 2026 1h 43m · 15 Sep 2026 · Prince William County Finance and Budget Committee

Sept. 15, 2026 Board of Supervisors Meeting 8h 46m · 15 Sep 2026 · Fairfax County Board of Supervisors

The Art of True Happiness | Dr. Arthur Brooks 2h 49m · 14 Sep 2026 · Huberman Lab

The Chris Wolfe Podcast: The Power of Quality Supplements 48 min · 14 Sep 2026 · EyeCode Media

Report any issue

Source

Recorded03 Jun 2024

Publisherfeeds.castos.com ↗

Handlerec:7002376

Show notes

Bill S-210, the mandated age verification bill for pornography sites that in reality targets everything from Google Search to Netflix, was expected to be the subject of extensive hearings by the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. But after a Conservative filibuster, it appears that there will be only one hearing and that the bill will be reported back to the House unamended. Before that vote, this week’s Law Bytes podcast offers up a “what could have been” hearing on the bill. It features my mock opening statement alongside responses to some of the actual questions raised by MPs on issues such as privacy, website blocking, and poorly defined terms in the bill.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Sign in