Lawsuit Over UC Santa Cruz's Diversity Statements Dismissed on Standing Grounds
The court concludes that, because the plaintiff hadn't applied to be hired, he didn't have standing to challenge the policy.
The court concludes that, because the plaintiff hadn't applied to be hired, he didn't have standing to challenge the policy.
Republicans should remember that they have spent years railing against censorship on college campuses.
The doctor's claims that he was open to either explanation is flatly contradicted by his literal words.
In an era when X (formerly Twitter) is blamed for all the ills of the world, here's a case where it did good.
that it’s probably not “‘trying to advance the public exchange of ideas’ essential to a healthy democracy.”
The lawyers also argue that the speech in the newspaper was “not made pursuant to its right of free speech, but to instead to advance the personal agendas of male faculty members at Notre Dame [and others].”
The state Senate bill, which is extremely similar to another House proposal, aims to scrap major First Amendment protections in defamation cases.
A good illustration of the strong policy of openness in American court cases, even when defendants argue that unfounded allegations in court records are intruding on their privacy and damaging their reputations.
The trial court found that "Decker continued contacting Siewert after she had asked him to stop five times" and "Decker's intent was to impose his will on Siewert to make her write about certain issues and to cover those issues in the way that he wanted them covered."
Restricting speech about the world's most pressing problems does not make them go away, nor does it settle any disputes.
Westbrook and the Jazz characterized the fan's insults to Westbrook as racist; in context, the court concluded, these were constitutionally protected statements of opinion.
Colorado, North Dakota, probably Montana, and maybe New York.
Police have set bounties on 13 activists, some living in the U.S.
New anti-drag laws were deemed unconstitutional in every state where they were challenged this year.
A rare federal court decision denying Younger abstention.
(Note that the court dealt with a professional licensing board's threat of punishment for such engineers; it doesn't deal with the separate question whether a government body may refuse to accept testimony from an unlicensed expert.)
The trial judge concluded the Tweet was “harassment by defamation.”
Stanford's Jay Bhattacharya debates St. John University's Kate Klonick on the federal government's role in social media censorship.
the Ninth Circuit rules, though expressly noting that "The question whether the Nevermind album cover meets the definition of child pornography is not at issue in this appeal."
recommends a Magistrate Judge, in a case brought over defendant student organization chair's claims that plaintiff had engaged in "sever[e], consisten[t], and widespread" misbehavior.
The Colorado Supreme Court's reasoning in deciding that Trump is constitutionally disqualified from running for president seems iffy.
Stella Assange discusses the imprisonment of her husband on the third episode of Just Asking Questions.
Law enforcement officials appear to have tarred ad hoc bands of protesters as members of an organized criminal movement.
The flip side of what happened with defendant-side discovery misconduct in the Rudy Giuliani and Alex Jones cases, though with much smaller stakes.
Some Substack writers are pressuring the platform to change its moderation policies. Others are urging Substack not to listen.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10