Unfortunately I believe there is a long case history that prevents courts from forcing them to say things as it violates the 1st amendment. Similar to forcing engineers to write code that puts "backdoors" into security systems.
I think there is precedent for apologizing as an alternative to punishment, but I'm no expert so you may well be correct.
Just look at Powell, she must write a letter of apology, but the difference there is she took a deal and agreed to it vs being forced into it I guess?
Right, my thought is that the apology would be in lieu of going to jail for contempt, so he isn't being forced to apologize, he violated a court order and is being punished, he could then choose to forgo punishment by apologizing.
I'm fascinated by your choice of analogy. Do you have a story to tell?
Unfortunately I believe there is a long case history that prevents courts from forcing them to say things as it violates the 1st amendment. Similar to forcing engineers to write code that puts "backdoors" into security systems.
I think there is precedent for apologizing as an alternative to punishment, but I'm no expert so you may well be correct.
Just look at Powell, she must write a letter of apology, but the difference there is she took a deal and agreed to it vs being forced into it I guess?
Right, my thought is that the apology would be in lieu of going to jail for contempt, so he isn't being forced to apologize, he violated a court order and is being punished, he could then choose to forgo punishment by apologizing.
I'm fascinated by your choice of analogy. Do you have a story to tell?
Not my story but the US government has tried a number of times to force engineers at Google/Apple to write backdoors into their encryption in order to "fight the terrorists". They've been prevented from doing that on 1st amendment grounds. Example: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/encryption-and-speech-surplus-building-backdoor-to-first-amendment