The ACLU Is Struggling To Find Its Identity In Post-Trump America
Despite its opposition to gun rights for individuals, the ACLU's drift away from its core mission resembles the NRA's recent trajectory.
Despite its opposition to gun rights for individuals, the ACLU's drift away from its core mission resembles the NRA's recent trajectory.
When a judge hearing a protection order petition thinks the defendant is engaged in "harassment," which can include two or more statements the judge thinks is libelous, the judge can effectively criminalize future libels of the plaintiff by the defendant.
What happens when YouTube and Facebook can be held liable for their users’ speech?
Plus: Uvalde cops didn't check classroom door, Texas GOP slides further to the right, telemedicine deregulation in peril, and more...
Students sued to protect their First and 14th Amendment rights.
The plaintiff alleged that the Wardlaw-Hartridge School had failed to comply with its own procedural rules in the Student-Parent Handbook.
But here the Iowa Supreme Court reduced the verdict to $3M, with an interesting analysis of the law of libel.
Qualified immunity denied in case alleging a probable-cause-less arrest based on plaintiff's (comedian Hannibal Buress's) speech "roast[ing a police officer's] ass."
The WikiLeaks founder faces espionage charges for publishing classified U.S. information, a prosecution with serious implications for all our First Amendment protections.
"We enforce our policies equally for everyone," said a spokesperson.
A Snapchat post containing this line and "a copy of the police report summarizing [a witness's] identification of [a person] as the shooter" leads to a four-year prison sentence for witness tampering; a New Jersey court says the post is a constitutionally unprotected true threat of violence.
and reverses a precedent that suggested that viewpoint-neutral speech restrictions in public K-12 schools are generally permissible.
One of the very few jobs where you'd get to litigate free speech law every day
at least in text messages to the grandchildren.
The award was entered against entertainment executive Damon Anthony Dash, former business partner of Jay-Z; $650K in libel damages to another plaintiff, plus likely $25K of the $125K, remain.
"[I]n this internet age, where jurors' names can trigger lightning-fast access to a wealth of biographical information, including addresses, any slightly positive role in divulging jurors' names to the public is outweighed by the risk to jury integrity."
Disreputable and censored comix improbably brought the art form from the gutter to the museums.
It looks like it was intended to cover unwanted sexual images sent to a particular person, but its text seems broad enough to potentially cover even posting things on your own site.
The court concludes that the federal "cyberstalking" statute covers only speech intended to "put the victim in fear of death or bodily injury" or to "distress the victim by threatening, intimidating, or the like."
When the Bushwick bar Honey's tried to host a “Russia, Ukraine, and Food" talk with food writer and academic Darra Goldstein, the angry mob shut them down.
William Fambrough supported the "wrong" mayoral candidate, so East Cleveland law enforcement destroyed his van and hit him with petty prosecutions.
What kind of a showing of possible "harassment" or "reprisals" must backers of such ballot measures make to keep petition signatures (and financial contributions) from becoming public records?
The court's view appears to be that, the more public interest in a case, the less the public is entitled to know.
The longtime head of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education announces a new name and expanded mission for FIRE.
Former Apple Daily writer Simon Lee says China's crackdown reveals the CCP's ambitions for global authoritarianism.
Plus: Coverage of Section 230 is overwhelmingly negative, Arizona cops who watched a man drown have been placed on leave, and more...
Its operative provisions just require social media platforms to create a mechanism for taking complaints about such "hateful" speech; but the title is "hateful conduct prohibited," and it's clear the legislature is trying to get social media platforms to restrict such speech more.
Under the reasoning of the Georgetown University Office of Institutional Diversity, Equity & Affirmative Action (IDEAA) report in the Ilya Shapiro matter, a wide range of public speech criticizing religions, political parties, veterans, etc. could be "prohibit[ed] harassment."
but because here the employer's (and union's) actions were basically just an incident of public criticism, they didn't qualify as hostile environment harassment (and the employee wasn't fired or demoted).
"Further analysis shows that you’ve made it impossible for me to fulfill the duties of my appointed post," writes Shapiro.
The law school reinstated him on a technicality, but made it clear that they weren't going to uphold the university's free speech policy.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is becoming the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
Plus: FIRE moves beyond campus, a 1,000 percent excise tax on semiautomatic rifles?, and more...
Can a web designer be compelled under the First Amendment to host wedding pictures?
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 thanksEvery 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 interestedSo 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 thanksPush back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not todayBack journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksBack independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksSupport journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksYour support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanksDonate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks