U.K. Targets U.S. Suicide Forum With Massive Fine It'll Never Collect
British speech police try to impose their restrictions on the entire world.
British speech police try to impose their restrictions on the entire world.
According to plaintiff, “[Prof.] Harner believed Plaintiff’s planned zine project [class assignment] was on ‘the issue of ‘trans’ people sexually assaulting others in prison,’ a topic Harner found ‘so many issues with.’”
The FCC chairman seems determined to impose a requirement that would amount to a ban on interviews with political candidates.
A new lawsuit claims that ChatGPT gave the shooter information about busy times on campus and how to use guns.
The losing party on this had argued, "[The other party's lawyer] gives up the ghost as a transphobe twisting the First Amendment to mean, in effect, 'Intentionally misgendering you is free, not hate, speech,' a hollow, disingenuous notion echoing willfully ignorant, intellectually dishonest predators who weaponize incompetence as our social fabric tears at the seams in this 'Age of Information.'"
"[A]bsent a clear showing of substantial harm to the child, the noncustodial parent retains his or her fundamental right to direct the child's religious upbringing during his or her parenting time."
The defense secretary argues that military retirees like Sen. Mark Kelly are not allowed to say things he unilaterally deems "prejudicial to good order and discipline."
Clive Johnston's conviction marks the first of its kind under buffer zone laws involving speech entirely unrelated to abortion.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche implausibly claims prosecutors can prove Comey "knowingly and willfully" threatened to murder the president.
Around the world, governments are censoring speech with the stated goal of shielding youth from online harms.
The president is not shy about using government power to punish people for saying things that offend him.
The case defies more than half a century of rulings on the “true threat” exception to the First Amendment.
European leaders' warnings of a democratic apocalypse failed to materialize in 2024.
Jay Near was a hateful man whose litigation set a vital precedent for free speech.
So holds an Oregon appellate court.
The term “hate speech” gets thrown around a lot, but it’s legally protected in the U.S.
So reasons a Florida appellate court, though other courts in other states seem to take a different view.
Jane and I lay out the structure of American defamation law, using the recent lawsuits brought by FBI Director Kash Patel as a launching point. Special bonus: Almost no discussion of New York Times v. Sullivan (an important case but one that listeners have doubtless heard much about elsewhere).
Financial censorship should worry us all, suggests Rainey Reitman in Transaction Denied.
"[S]tatements made to third parties can be 'directed at' the victim," and thus criminal harassment if they're repeated and likely to cause serious annoyance or distress, "when they are designed to provoke an adverse consequence against the victim."
When he returned to the White House, Trump vowed to protect free speech from the government. The FCC's latest move against ABC and Disney looks like the opposite.
The panel (by a 2-1 vote) stayed a district court order that, among other things, blocked the newly established escort requirement.
But the judge suspends his decision pending appeal, so that the appellate court has "time to consider and decide the merits of this case, absent unnecessary procedural deadlines."
Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.