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.
A judge lets Loomer's defamation claim against Maher and HBO go forward.
The pandemic showed the weakness of the leadership class. [UPDATE: Inadvertently posted it under my byline, but it's of course Ilya Shapiro's post, as the byline now reflects. -EV]
The Supreme Court appears poised to uphold a ban on the app, but many creators aren't so sure.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a Texas case that could have major ramifications across the country—including, perhaps, the end of anonymity online.
Anyone discussing free speech should at least try to get this right.
featuring Prof. Saurabh Vishnubhakat (Yeshiva), Profs. Gregory Dickinson (Nebraska), Prof. Christina Mulligan (Brooklyn), Dhruva Krishna (Kirkland & Ellis), and me.
My "lived experience" at Georgetown gave me a unique perspective on the higher-ed crisis.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanks
Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks