Plus, does speech about a celebrity become "intentional infliction of emotional distress" when the celebrity is known to have been "trauma[tized]" by a violent crime?
The full transcript shows the president's complaints about the editing of the interview are not just wildly hyperbolic and legally groundless. They are demonstrably false.
A federal district court discusses how the First Amendment limits liability for "hostile environment harassment" based on "speech on matters of public concern" in universities (public or private). And the reasoning may extend to Title VII liability on workplaces as well.
Brendan Carr has a clear record of threatening to suppress constitutionally protected speech.
FIRE’s executive V.P. discusses the Biden administration's failures, Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s influence on free speech, and the most pressing First Amendment issues facing the U.S. today.
Settling Trump’s CBS lawsuit won’t buy peace—it will sell out press freedom.
Elon Musk sues seven more companies for pulling advertising from his platform.
“Plaintiff has not conducted this litigation as though it involves matters of a highly sensitive and personal nature—instead, she would cloak herself in pseudonymity, and the protections it affords, while publicly lobbing allegations at Defendant by name.”
The settlement vindicates Kimberly Diei's First Amendment right to comment on sexually explicit rap songs without suffering government retaliation.
That's because it apparently covers only grants to foreign organizations operating abroad, and a 2020 Supreme Court decision generally held that the First Amendment doesn't apply in such situations.
The settlement of the civil case follows guilty pleas or convictions in related criminal cases.
The Michigan Court of Appeals just upheld the conviction, under a statute that requires showing of purpose to (among other things) "harass[]" or "molest[]," and reason to know that third parties would send the target unwanted and "harass[ing]" or "molest[ing]" messages. The statute doesn't require any showing that the accusations were false.
Nunes and his family's farm can't sufficiently show damages, so the court doesn't have to reach any of the other elements of defamation.
But at least he restored respect for a tariff-loving predecessor by renaming a mountain.
"Every day I confront a bill that wants to ban another Chinese company," the Kentucky senator tells Reason.
By the end of 2025, as many as 100 million Americans could live in a state where they can be reported for protected expression.
and thus not actionable defamation, unless defendant "implies undisclosed facts by insinuating that the plaintiff" engaged in specific racist acts or made (undisclosed) racist statements.
A unanimous Supreme Court decision established as much in 1965.
as courts rarely protect defendants who count on executive non-enforcement," writes Prof. Alan Rozenshtein (Minnesota).
But "[n]othing in Plaintiff's conclusory assertions suggest that Plaintiff could plead facts plausibly linking his identity with that of the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto."
The popular video app restored service in the U.S. after President-elect Donald Trump promised to postpone a federal ban.
One of many allegedly defamatory statements allegedly sent by a former summer intern at a financial company; the court holds a proposed preliminary injunction against future speech by defendant about plaintiff would be an unconstitutional prior restraint, but issues a narrower injunction.
