notwithstanding the “litigation privilege,” if the statute of limitations has long passed and there is therefore no reasonable prospect of meritorious litigation.
China's economic reforms were bottom-up, not top-down.
Recent articles in the Texas Monthy and the New York Times provide some useful insight on why Texas has been gaining migrants at such a high rate.
Advice from a judge to the litigants in a libel case.
“We have been through horrific things, but I’m still proud of being Uyghur," says Tursunay Ziyawudun, a survivor of China's torture camps.
"The statements include that Hubbard ... has been 'advocating for pederasty (pedophilia) for as long as he has taught at the University of Texas.'"
and remands for retrial as to whether such a purpose would be shown.
Four courts have recently said yes, in cases brought by conservative Muslims and Christians.
A new report says 83 percent of the world's population is less free today than it was in 2008, and the gap between the world's most and least free countries is growing.
Federal regulators have permanently lifted a requirement that mifepristone be dispensed in person.
"Dominion's well-pleaded allegations, however, support the reasonable inference that Fox's reporting was not accurate or dispassionate."
A white administrator is claiming she was fired based on her race, and based on her complaints that her department chair said "I despise white people" and various other things.
can go forward as to the "false light" claim, but not as to the libel claim (at least unless the plaintiff can amend his Complaint to adequately allege specific economic losses).
It's a fairly benign thing to say. And yet it's a landmine in our media landscape.
The Institute for Justice wants the Supreme Court to review the case—and to clarify the proper scope of "investigatory stops."
“The events of January 6th were an attack on the foundation of our democracy. But this does not relieve the Department of Justice from following its own guidelines, written to preserve the very same democracy.... [This case] leaves the court to wonder who watches the watchmen.”
The charge requires proof that James and Jennifer Crumbley knew their son posed a threat and could have prevented the attack through "ordinary care."
Offending the powerful can be dangerous in an increasingly authoritarian world.
"The market was asking that anyone who didn't need to go into the store to please stay outside," she says.
MyPillow founder Michael Lindell loses lawsuit over allegedly false claim that he had a "secret romance with 30 Rock actress Jane Krakowski and wooed her with flowers and champagne."
Gavin Newsom is exploring legislation to authorize private civil actions against people who sell "assault weapons" or gun kits.
“During discovery, plaintiff shall not inquire of the defendant concerning his prior sexual or romantic experiences ... with anyone unless the identity of the person ... has been disclosed by the [person] or otherwise become public, in either case in connection with a claim, published report in mainstream media, or public allegation that any such sexual or romantic experience or encounter was not in all respects consensual.”
Keeping professors from testifying in lawsuits isn't the school's only free speech problem
In response to the Supreme Court's ruling largely precluding pre-enforcement challenge of the Texas abortion law, Governor Newsom calls for similar action on guns.
Federal district court holds that the First Amendment sharply limits restrictions on such professional-client speech, at least when the speech doesn’t involve “prescribing medication or reaching a diagnosis.”
Things are far from completely clear. But Justice Gorsuch's opinion may give preenforcement challenges to SB 8 and other similar laws a good deal more wiggle room than many think.
The Court allowed claims against health care regulators to proceed, but that will not prevent the private civil actions authorized by the law.
District Court Judge David Peeples focused on the law's "unique and unprecedented" enforcement mechanism rather than abortion rights.
In a significant threat to the free press, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange faces decades in federal prison for leaking classified documents.
It's time to spread cheer. Reason is here to help.
The Court rules that the lawsuit against SB 8 can proceed by targeting state licensing officials. But the implications for future cases are far from completely clear.
There's no general federal right to them; they are often available when a law is enforced by government officials, but generally not as to laws in which private citizens sue (whether over abortion, speech, religious exercise, gun ownership or sales, or anything else).
The private litigation against some defendants may proceed, but the federal lawsuit is gone.
The ruling is mostly based on the Texas state constitution and probably will not affect the federal case challenging SB 8, currently before the Supreme Court. But it makes some notable points, nonetheless.
The organization's embrace of a wide-ranging progressive agenda undermines its reason for existing.
The change stems from a First Amendment case brought by the Institute for Justice, a leading libertarian public interest law firm.
“The Very Reverend Georges F. de Laire, J.C.L., who serves as the Judicial Vicar and the Vicar for Canonical Affairs for the Diocese of Manchester, brings a defamation claim against Gary Michael Voris, Anita Carey, and St. Michael’s Media, Inc. a/k/a Church Militant.”
Flagging some interesting blog posts on the question.
Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.
Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanks
Every 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 interested
So 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 thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks