Incumbents' Political Campaign Facebook Pages Aren't Public Fora,
so viewpoint-based blocking of commenters doesn't violate the First Amendment.
so viewpoint-based blocking of commenters doesn't violate the First Amendment.
"There is no question that inaccurate statements were made by the government as part of these proceedings—to both Judge Schroeder and the undersigned"—but it appears that the details of this alleged misconduct remain sealed.
It's none of their business.
"We hear you and we are sorry."
"The kind of values I've always embraced are heard more on Fox than on CNN and MSNBC, where they're not welcome."
For the officer's excessive force, the protester was later awarded a $175,000 settlement over the 2016 incident.
"They don't want the defendant to tell this side of the story," says Clark Neily of the Cato Institute.
Though book banners may try to convince otherwise, students don't need protection from the passion portrayed in Shakespeare's classic.
''The kind of values I've always embraced are heard more on Fox than on CNN and MSNBC," says the Pulitzer Prize–winning progressive journalist.
Among other things, "A jury could reasonably conclude that, before making so weighty an accusation as rape based on nothing more than hearsay evidence, the prudent person would, at a minimum, want to hear the other person's side of the story."
The feds now admit there was "no need" for such a thing.
We can condemn the actions of Moscow without forfeiting the right to point out missteps in Kyiv.
The lawsuit, which stems from statements about the fraternity’s use of a salute that looks similar to a Nazi salute and robes that some viewed as similar to Klan robes was rejected chiefly on the grounds that the statement was about the fraternity not the plaintiff, and was in any event opinion.
Amazon's decision to stop selling the book shows the pressure platforms are under to reject speech that doesn't conform to progressive orthodoxy.
As pop culture icons enter the public domain, a strange new era of copyright begins.
Stuart Reges placed a land acknowledgment in his syllabus. Just not the one his university wanted.
Heather Ann Thompson's Blood in the Water might lead to "disobedience," prison officials say.
The majority reads the statute broadly, and holds it's unconstitutionally overbroad; the dissent would read it more narrowly, as limited to constitutionally unprotected solicitation of specific criminal conduct.
A conservative argues today's left is channeling Puritan theocrats when they try to prevent us from enjoying ourselves. Is he correct?
And, even more exciting, there’s personal jurisdiction thrown in.
The D.C. Circuit so held, concluding that the FCC regulation exceeded its powers under the federal Communications Act.
A good illustration of how many courts deal with personal jurisdiction in libel cases.
Good thing Zak Smith had lawyer characters with 18 Tort Law Acumen.
Antiabortion activists are the new Anthony Comstocks.
Is negligently providing information to a dangerous person comparable to negligently entrusting a gun to a dangerous person (assuming a reasonable person would have realized the person was dangerous)?
The book may never achieve the cultural recognition of some other top censorship targets, but the fight over I Am Jazz symbolizes America's trans moral panic.
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