Paycheck Protection Program Exclusion of Nude Dancing Establishments Upheld
The Second Circuit held that this was a permissible viewpoint-neutral restriction on a subsidy program.
The Second Circuit held that this was a permissible viewpoint-neutral restriction on a subsidy program.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson denied qualified immunity to the officers involved in Patterson v. United States.
The Ninth Circuit decides a case involving "Rise Above Movement" white supremacists who participated in riots in California.
Democracies are going to have to do better at exercising their core liberal values to prove their worth and win back support.
One bill would require lengthy disclaimers on all online political ads.
Plus: The era of sovereign influencers, a new experiment in universal basic income, and more...
May plaintiffs alleged sexual assault proceed pseudonymously, when the defendant is being publicly named?
The libel claim, the court held, was foreclosed by an agreement settling the lawsuit that had indirectly led to the review.
The bill was introduced by Colorado Senate president pro tem Kerry Donovan (who is also running for Congress).
"[O]nce a matter is brought before a court for resolution, it is no longer solely the parties' case, but also the public's case."
So a federal district court apparently held in Green v. Miss United States of America, LLC.
The statements about former law student Jonathan Mullane were either a fair report of court proceedings or protected by the First Amendment.
The podcast is about Charles Harrelson (actor Woody Harrelson's father), who had been convicted of murdering a federal judge
These demands obviously violate the First Amendment.
(Clare Locke LLP is one of the top plaintiff's-side libel law firms, though this isn't a libel case.)
Not sure that paying for sex makes you an "extraordinary gentleman," even if you do try to "give something back" by providing expert consumer reviews.
An interesting decision on a motion to dismiss in this libel lawsuit.
Plastic surgeon David Shifrin is suing commenters who posted negative reviews based on an ex-patient's critical YouTube video. (There are also libel claims in the lawsuit as well.)
This misguided effort to combat "misinformation" is a brazen assault on free speech.
Just like a city can allow some monuments in city parks without having to allow others.
The Oregon Supreme Court has agreed to reconsider its earlier precedents denying non-media speakers certain First Amendment libel law protections.
He was no libertarian, but he absorbed an important lesson about regulating speech.
My article was about Kelly Hyman v. Alex Daoud, in which a court order seemed to command all Internet "services" to remove material that mentions plaintiff or her husband (retired federal bankruptcy judge Paul Hyman).
It's the result of our overly politicized culture where many people like to shame and destroy their enemies, but it is undermining the benefits of free and open dialogue.
That's tomorrow (as I write this), 2 to 3 pm Pacific time; free, but registration required.
Behemoth frontman Adam 'Nergal' Darski was fined $5,000 for a 2019 social media post that showed him stepping on an image of the Virgin Mary.
You may have seen stories about the operation of Facebook's new and innovative "Supreme Court." Don't believe 'em.
I'm serializing a forthcoming law review article of mine.
Abrasive, tasteless, and uncompromising, Flynt undoubtedly made the world safer for speech of all varieties.
Plus: The aftermath of the New York Times' anti-Pornhub crusade, and more...
whenever the judge, prosecutor, or police officer demands that the relative's name be taken down.
One provision has been invalidated, but the general ban on boycotts of Israel by most state government contractors still stands.
Likely fair use, at least under the Second Circuit's precedents.
"It is simply not reasonable for a plaintiff to bring a case alleging that his constitutional rights were violated by state officials and not expect the facts on which those officials based their actions to be included in the public record of a case."
Tech companies should have the same freedom to choose their customers.