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.
A discussion with Prof. RonNell Andersen Jones (Utah), two noted media lawyers and clinical teachers (Prof. Dale Cohen, UCLA, and Prof. Gregg Leslie, Arizona State), and me about this forthcoming Journal of Free Speech Law article.
The district court decision upholding the ATF's conclusion that bump stocks constitute unlawful "machine guns" is upheld by an equally divided court.
Our videos make the case for "Free Minds and Free Markets" to millions of people a year.
Gov. Greg Abbott attacks First Amendment rights in the name of defending them.
Why give legacy media a stranglehold over information that Twitter at its best is great for sharing?
“All of those…just come out of Lochner.”
So much for education being a universal human right.
Plus: SCOTUS hears oral arguments in landmark abortion case, supply chain bottlenecks and labor shortages are holding back economic growth, and more...
The law is unconstitutional as written—but it has also been used by prosecutors far beyond its specific terms.
My testimony today before a House Subcommittee on Communications & Technology hearing on proposed revisions to § 230.
My testimony today before a House Subcommittee on Communications & Technology hearing on proposed revisions to § 230.
My testimony today before a House Subcommittee on Communications & Technology hearing on proposed revisions to § 230.
My testimony today before a House Subcommittee on Communications & Technology hearing on proposed revisions to § 230.
My testimony today before a House Subcommittee on Communications & Technology hearing on proposed revisions to § 230.
The justices may find it difficult to uphold Mississippi's abortion ban without overturning Roe v. Wade.
The oft-heard argument that something isn't "written in the Constitution" is not as compelling as it might seem. Sometimes, it's outright false.
"Given the charged atmosphere concerning vaccinations and vaccine mandates, and for the other reasons discussed above, the Court is persuaded that this is the rare case where a party should be permitted to proceed pseudonymously."
It's true that some users spread lies on social media. But this can’t be solved by partisan “fact-checking."
The "viability" rule is arbitrary. So are the alternatives.
It's with Profs. Jack Balkin (Yale), Daphne Keller (Stanford), and Mark Lemley (Stanford), moderated by Jane Bambauer (Arizona).
Despite such magazines being widely and lawfully used, and with the ban having been tossed out by other courts and court panels, the 9th Circuit thinks the ban does not violate the Second Amendment
The decision is at odds with rulings by some other federal courts, and could end up setting an important precedent.
An important and interesting question, arising here as to Title IX, free speech, and due process, but relevant more generally as well (and now pending before the Supreme Court).
Even when you're not wearing it.
A federal court wasn't having it.
The argument made by Finnis, George, Hammer and others, that abortion is unconstitutional is not supported by text or history.
Eric Adams thinks he can give the police more power to hunt for guns without making innocent minority men the inevitable target.
The site's long-serving boss might be more committed to free speech than his successor, Parag Agrawal.
Plus: Los Angeles will start fining businesses that don't enforce the city's vaccine passport system, Disney yanks a China-critical Simpsons episode, and more...
A school board official told said "students would not participate in a book-club event scheduled for February with Nadia Murad, a Nobel Prize-winner and activist," because "Ms. Murad’s book, 'The Last Girl: My Story of Captivity, and My Fight Against the Islamic State,' would foster Islamophobia."
The IRS' track record suggests that beefed up enforcement will also mean more trampling of Americans' due process rights.
The jury rightly concluded that the prosecution failed to prove its case.
Did you think Kyle Rittenhouse's endorsement of Black Lives Matter was odd? Think of all the unusual stuff you've forgotten.
Some are using Kyle Rittenhouse's acquittal to argue for harsher laws and punishments. Andrew Coffee IV's case is a study in why that's an awful idea.
Florida passed a law to stop big tech “censorship.” But the law itself tramples First Amendment rights.
Restrictions have little chance of moving beyond political theater, or of winning compliance if passed.
No, because courts conclude that those terms are just opinions and name-calling.
The official was the Vice President for Student Affairs and Diversity at the University of North Dakota.
Are universities supposed to have institutional views on the facts about self-defense in a case half a continent way?
Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.
