Do Anti-BDS Laws Restrict Speech?
The line between commercial decisions and advocacy is not as clear as opponents of anti-Israel boycotts suggest.
The line between commercial decisions and advocacy is not as clear as opponents of anti-Israel boycotts suggest.
The lawsuit stemmed from CNN's coverage of Dershowitz's argument in the first Trump impeachment trial.
The case is an indictment on just how hard it is to get accountability when the government violates your rights.
Charles Marohn called himself an engineer in speeches and articles while his license was temporarily expired. The First Amendment protects his right to do that.
Yet "[i]t is particularly troubling to the Court that [the lawyer] appears to have survived this motion more by dumb luck than any concerted effort on his part to comply with either his professional responsibilities or the orders of this Court."
(Lolicon is "A Japanese term derived from the English phrase 'Lolita complex,' lolicon describes a fascination with cartoons of very young-looking girls engaged in varying degrees of erotic behavior.")
But people have as much right to protest vaccination sites as they do to protest factories, stores, or abortion clinics.
Plus: critical race theory and ideal libertarian political appointees
So holds a Pennsylvania court, affirming a conviction for fraudulently obtaining money by claims of veteran status.
But modest redactions are permissible.
The decision will make it even more difficult for victims to hold the government accountable when their rights are violated.
Though Trump is gone, the desire to bend the internet toward partisan goals is alive and well.
even if the press release accurately summarizes the Complaint; the rule is different in some states, such as California.
The Supreme Court has a chance to fix this. The stakes are high.
Plus: Trump administration spied on CNN reporter, the right's wrong turn on economic liberty, and more...
We expect British royals to favor muzzling commoners, but too many lawmakers feel the same way.
The movie depicts the fictionalized gathering of Cassius Clay, Malcolm X, Jim Brown, and Sam Cooke, who spar over what each is doing to advance civil rights.
National surveys obscure large regional variations in public opinion about abortion limits.
The surprising move raises concerns about academic freedom.
Calling a classmate a racist slur on Snapchat is offensive. It’s also protected speech.
Plus: Three things that aren't as bad as they seem, Tennessee bans certain treatments for transgender minors, and more...
Cops say they can't function without qualified immunity, while their supporters on the right say abolishing it would be a step toward defunding the police. Neither claim is true.
The victim will now have no right to argue his case before a jury in civil court.
It's a working model for non-state governance in cyberspace that is vastly preferable to government control of social media.
Targeting “extremists” threatens civil liberties while increasing the stresses that lead to violence.
Plus: On SATs and bias, what changed when Texas lifted its mask mandate, and more...
Released May 10, but just posted on Westlaw.
The policies don't accomplish much more than putting money in some gun owners' pockets.
The defendant had been barred from presenting his defense, as a sanction for his persistent violation of court orders, including one that he had expressly consented to.
Plus: Cult panic, what the AT&T merger means, and more...
Only students support extending the power to penalize speech, raising concerns about what they’re learning in school.
If plaintiff broadly claims that defendant libeled her by "imputing unchastity," she risks having to disclose a lot about her sexual history.
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.
Plus: Death penalty proposed for Atlanta massage parlor shooter, judge tosses Google antitrust suit, and more...
If the officer succeeds, the victim will not be allowed to sue on those claims.
And claims of veiled threats don't change that.
Regulations might reshape DIY gun products, but they can’t eliminate the demand that created the industry.
Rutgers Law School, the National Coalition on Censorship, and the Washington Post.
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