A New Case Gives the Supreme Court a Chance To Defend Gun Rights
It's likely that soon, almost all Americans will be legally able to carry guns.
It's likely that soon, almost all Americans will be legally able to carry guns.
So holds a Fifth Circuit panel (by a 2-to-1 vote), in an assignment requiring the writing of the Pledge of Allegiance, but the same argument would apply, I think, to compelled statements of other ideologies, whether related to patriotism, race, sex, sexual orientation, or anything else.
The officers might receive qualified immunity, however.
The plaintiff is Francesca Viola, who wrote the comment when she was a journalism professor at Temple University.
"Bartolotti alleges that 'anytime you search [his] name on [the internet, he is] affiliated with this case,' which 'has affected [his] personal and professional lives [and] has become a safety issue at times as well.'"
The Court clarified that the challenged policy need only be a "de facto final" decision, and that property owners are not required to exhaust all possible state bureaucratic procedures before filing a federal takings case. The Court also emphasized that Takings Clause property rights have "full-fledged constitutional status."
"In what legal universe is it not even plausibly unreasonable to knowingly immolate someone?" asks dissenting judge
The statute immunizes computer services for "action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict ... availability of material that the provider ... considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected"—but what exactly does that mean?
The suspension is based on "demonstrably false and misleading statements" that Giuliani made as Donald Trump's lawyer.
This is the case against DeRay Mckesson, brought by a police officer who was injured in a protest that Mckesson allegedly organized.
Baltimore kept tabs on citizens' movement across 90 percent of the city, without a warrant, to investigate crimes.
What seems like a gun rights case actually presents some important questions of administrative law.
Law enforcers have plenty of tools; they just want to paw through our data without effort or expense.
Cracking down on "rogue gun dealers" and enforcing background checks won't stop criminals from arming themselves.
No, it’s not an attempt to monitor faculty and student views. It’s an attempt to make sure they’re allowed to express them.
A way of warning someone they might feel offended is itself offensive?
The FBI provided "no factual basis for the seizure," Judge R. Gary Klausner wrote.
After Chinese authorities conducted newsroom raids and arrested top editors, pro-democracy publication Apple Daily realized it could no longer safely operate.
Once again, it shows just how hard it is to hold bad officers accountable.
Why is straight reporting on educational reform measures so difficult.
The article assesses today's important Supreme Court property rights ruling.
We'll be ready to publish articles on this subject as early as September, if you submit them by August 1.
First Amendment advocates prevailed in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.
Holding a sign in a public park should not cause an arrest.
"In lower courts' view, [a] federal badge now equals absolute immunity."
The former Google engineer talks about inflation, the Austrian school of economics, and how bitcoin is revolutionizing banking.
The ruling makes it far more difficult for the government to authorize physical invasions of private property without having to pay compensation under the Takings Clause.
The Court doesn't set forth a categorical rule protecting such speech, but strongly suggests that such speech is normally protected by the First Amendment—and defines political speech broadly, to include criticism (even vulgar criticism) of school programs and officials.
Advertisers found that appeasing an illiberal mob wasn’t a safe choice after all.
The anti-commandeering principle serves causes favored by both the right and the left.
The article is Part I of a two-part series.
In many professional arenas, Wu's swings and misses would have consequences. In Wu's case, it landed him an advisory role in the Biden administration.
It responds to a critique of the Supreme Court's major property rights ruling in Knick v. Township of Scott, by Profs. Stewart Sterk and Michael Pollack.
Plus: Biden to back bill ending crack/cocaine sentencing disparity, the truth about tech startup creation, and more...
The Justice Department's proposal encourages states to take away people's Second Amendment rights based on little more than bare allegations.
Plus: Georgia's voting roll purge draws media hype, Florida's drug law hypocrisy, and more...
China’s government emphasizes control over prosperity while a demoralized West offers little opposition.
Warren Lent is suing the California Coastal Commission, arguing that its power to unilaterally hand down massive fines with minimal process is unconstitutional.
David Chipman's obfuscation, like the president's vagueness, is aimed at concealing the illogic of targeting firearms based on their "military-style" appearance.
That time a civil rights activist teamed up with Richard Nixon to build a black-run town in rural North Carolina
When (1) states seek to protect abortion rights / gun rights / speech rights against private restriction, and (2) Congress seeks to encourage such private restrictions by preempting the state law protections, might such federal preemption violate the Constitution?
Far from being somehow at odds with July 4, Juneteenth celebrates the greatest achievement of the principles of the Revolution and Founding.
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