"The undersigned finds that despite Mr. Caggiano's belief that his post makes an important point [criticizing] Bernie Sanders, the undersigned finds that it can be logically read to be patently offensive, discriminatory, and degrading to women."
The conversation will be about Prof. Strossen's Journal of Free Speech Law article, "The Interdependence of Racial Justice and Free Speech for Racists," and it will be with Profs. Jane Bambauer, Ash Bhagwat, and me.
The law is unconstitutional as written—but it has also been used by prosecutors far beyond its specific terms.
The anti-Biden slogan is clearly protected by the First Amendment.
for saying "LGBTQ+" "Pride" message is "against our biblical doctrine."
An interesting "harassment, intimidate, or bullying" investigation case from New Jersey schools. (Corrected version of a post initially put up yesterday.)
An interesting “harassment, intimidate, or bullying” investigation case from New Jersey schools.
Attempts by British lawmakers to erase online anonymity would lead to radical speech being pushed underground.
A new analysis reportedly showing a huge proportion of TikTok content is racist tells us nothing about the overall prevalence of extremist and bigoted content on the app.
"It is crucial to ensure that prohibitions on targeting people based on protected characteristics not be construed in a manner that shields governments or institutions from criticism."
This includes "burning a national flag or religious texts, caricatures of religious figures, or criticism of ideologies."
Americans oppose restrictions, but report feeling less free to speak about political matters.
Two Illinois legislators meet with a high school principal complaining about an anti-China poster distributed by a student group, which promptly loses its faculty sponsor and has to
We expect British royals to favor muzzling commoners, but too many lawmakers feel the same way.
Calling a classmate a racist slur on Snapchat is offensive. It’s also protected speech.
But the "racial ridicule" statute under which this is happening (1) by its terms doesn't cover such speech, and (2) if it did, it would be unconstitutional.
The elected prosecutor (Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby) is claiming that the station's coverage of her is "blatantly slanted, dishonest, misleading, racist, and extremely dangerous."
"Given that the child is of mixed race, it would seem apparent that the presence of the flag is not in the child's best interests, as the mother must encourage and teach the child to embrace her mixed race identity, rather than thrust her into a world that only makes sense through the tortured lens of cognitive dissonance."
Columbia University linguist John McWhorter on "anti-racism" as a new, misguided civic religion and his new book on curses, Nine Nasty Words.
whether the U.S., China, Israel, or anyone else.
The bill was introduced by Colorado Senate president pro tem Kerry Donovan (who is also running for Congress).
Colleen Oefelein was fired by the Jennifer De Chiara Literary Agency, and the incident illustrates the vagueness of New York law on this point.
A controversy at the University of Illinois Chicago John Marshall Law School (not to be confused with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).
Yes, the Ohio Court of Appeals held Thursday.
The more that big social media companies act like they can control what people say, the more competition they encourage.
But such a ban would be unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, whether applied to the Confederate flag, white supremacist symbols, or whatever else might be labeled as "hate[ful]."
Richard Stengel published that argument in the Washington Post last year.
The subject of the new film Mighty Ira explains why social justice warriors are wrong to attack free speech.
Inspired by Germany's notorious hate-speech law, more countries seek to impose steep penalties on platforms that don't comply with their censorship whims.
