Good Riddance to Ed Martin, Trump's Failed Pick for U.S. Attorney for D.C.
Martin is a bully and a menace to free speech. Unfortunately for him, his own free speech caught up with him.
Martin is a bully and a menace to free speech. Unfortunately for him, his own free speech caught up with him.
The Harvard psychologist discusses recent gains for free speech at Harvard, growing political and ideological threats to academic freedom, and the importance of shared knowledge in sustaining truth and progress.
"Unlike 'Festivus,' the fictional holiday created by Jewish artists, wherein 'worshippers' are permitted to air their personal grievances but once per year," "Ye adheres to an artistic vision in which he is unencumbered to share his grievances at any time of the year—and so he does."
The IGO Anti-Boycott Act would dramatically expand U.S. anti-boycott laws. The House quietly postponed a vote after running into unexpected Republican opposition.
Earlier this year, state Rep. Laurel Libby made a post criticizing trans women in women's sports. Her refusal to apologize has cost Libby her right to speak on the House floor and vote on legislation.
Campus protests against Israel have revived debates over the limits of First Amendment protections.
The brief gives a good explanation of why such actions violate the First Amendment.
A U.S. district judge called Mohsen Mahdawi’s detention a “great harm to a person who has been charged with no crime.”
"It is unthinkable that a person in a free society could be snatched from the street, imprisoned, and threatened with deportation for expressing an opinion the government dislikes," says FIRE.
Congress just approved a new online censorship scheme under the auspices of thwarting revenge porn and AI-generated "nonconsensual intimate visual depictions."
Please feel free to forward this to anyone you think might be interested.
The administration's lawyers claim that this was justified by Khalil's likelihood of escape.
The federal judge rightly rejects the request.
Live by your own rule, Ruhle!
Two of his targets are seeking permanent injunctions against the president's blatantly unconstitutional executive orders.
To remain independent, institutions of higher education should end their reliance on taxpayer money.
The president has launched a multifaceted crusade against speech that offends him.
The administration's demands extend far beyond its avowed concern about antisemitism and enforcement of "civil rights laws."
The president's lawyers also conflate fraud with defamation, misconstrue the commercial speech doctrine, and assert that false speech is not constitutionally protected.
"After receiving their surrogate baby, the couple purportedly performed an at-home DNA test 'which showed that [the would-be father] was in no way related to the baby.'"
Support for suppressing "violent content" has also dropped.
"This Court should not announce an opt-out right for religious objectors under the Free Exercise Clause that its precedents would foreclose for students objecting to public-school curricula under the Free Speech Clause."
The secretary of state, who aims to "liberate American speech," nevertheless wants to deport U.S. residents for expressing opinions that offend him.
Just a quarter of respondents said they favored deporting students for "expressing pro-Palestine views."
Harvard's law faculty previously criticized the Obama administration's assault on norms of free speech and due process.
But one of the pro-pseudonymity decisions on which the court relies (which also involved a lawsuit alleging anti-Semitic behavior) was actually reversed two weeks ago.
The bill risks "punishing parents simply for disagreeing with the state's preferred views on gender," Aaron Terr, a First Amendment attorney, tells Reason.
Richard Nixon infamously drafted an "enemies list" of people he wanted to go after. At least Trump conducts his corruption out in the open.
In Colombia, a court claims the answer is yes. Could that happen here?