"Dr. Gustilo made ... posts ... concerning controversial political issues including presidential candidates, fascism, racism, police killings, Black Lives Matter, socialism, and COVID.... [She alleged she] 'also began to voice ... opposition to critical race theory ..., because CRT theorists “reject the principle of equality under the law” and “warn[ ] people of color against ‘internalized whiteness.’"'"
The Second Circuit holds that the challengers sufficiently alleged that the ban is broad enough to cover their constitutionally protected speech (including speech that may offend some based on gender identity, race, religion, and more); the court didn't reach the question whether the ban actually violates the First Amendment, which the trial court will now have to take up.
Trump's pick to run the FBI has a long list of enemies he plans to "come after," with the legal details to be determined later.
It looks like we can expect the antitrust assaults to continue.
The court rejects the City's action as implementing a "heckler's veto."
Not libel, says the Second Circuit: "the truth is so near to the facts as published that ... no legal harm has been done."
The popular but beleaguered social media app will have until January 19 to find an American buyer or be banned.
Is it libelous to (1) accuse him of "antisemitism" and (2) accuse him (incorrectly) of having painted a swastika?
"We're gonna come after the people in the media," the Trump stalwart warns. "Whether it's criminally or civilly, we'll figure that out."
The Ninth Circuit upholds defendant’s conviction.
"Plaintiff offers no evidence to support a finding that Defendant's promise of support was an unambiguous promise to not penalize Plaintiff for any actions she took as long as she believed they were in support of her Arab Muslim heritage."
including when employees were required to "correctly" answer multiple choice questions based on the training content.
it's intended "to conceal the abortion from the minor's parents or guardian," holds a Ninth Circuit panel. But the panel rejects a challenge to restrictions on "harboring" or "transporting" the minor under such circumstances.
This is in West Hollywood, right near where I lived for a while; many of the Sunset Strip billboards are indeed visually striking, but that doesn't mean the permitting scheme can rely on city officials' aesthetic judgments.
So a federal judge rules in a case brought by Tony Bobulinski, who testified about the Bidens before the House Oversight Committee, against Jessica Tarlov, a Fox News commentator and co-host of The Five.
The heart of our argument for a preliminary injunction in First Amendment Coalition, LaRoe & Volokh v. Chiu.
CAIR's allegedly libelous press release about a dismissed former high-level employee "opened the door" to discovery about various allegations the employee had made about CAIR.
Lacey can await the resolution of his appeal outside of prison.
We're challenging a California statute that bans publishing "information relating to a sealed arrest."
From criminal penalties to bounty hunters, state laws targeting election-related synthetic media raise serious First Amendment concerns.
The company, which says it takes an "apolitical approach" to rating news outlets, faces regulatory threats and a congressional probe because of its perceived bias against conservatives.
the politicized class of professors is a serious political liability to any party that it supports."
A board employee and a local reporter were arrested on the same bogus charge of divulging nonexistent grand jury secrets.
"[The] reference was made in the context of describing Melzer's and the O9A's views of those values to explain why, according to them, those values had to be defeated through violent conduct if their goal of chaos was to be achieved"; "the Order of the Nine Angels ('O9A')" "is a violent, white supremacist, neo-Nazi, Satanist, pro-jihadist group."
Brendan Carr’s plans for "reining in Big Tech" are a threat to limited government, free speech, free markets, and the rule of law.
"Reining in Big Tech," Brendan Carr says, requires scrapping liability protections and restricting moderation decisions.
Abortion battles are becoming tech policy battles.
After the federal judge denied the university's motion for summary judgment, the case settled. Among other things, the judge concluded that allegations that a coach acted in a racist way were "defamation per se," so that plaintiff didn't have to show specific damages stemming from the allegations.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! 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
Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
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