A Texas News Vlogger Asks SCOTUS To Decide Whether Criminalizing Journalism Is 'Obviously Unconstitutional'
This is Priscilla Villarreal’s second trip to the Supreme Court, which last year revived her First Amendment lawsuit.
This is Priscilla Villarreal’s second trip to the Supreme Court, which last year revived her First Amendment lawsuit.
"There was also evidence presented regarding Liza's alleged delusional thinking and hallucinations. Eli testified that Liza told him Kenneth was his physical father, but actor Chris Hemsworth was his spiritual father. Eli also testified that for years Liza had talked about having another daughter someday, whom she would name Phoebe, and Hemsworth would be the father. Brigham testified that Liza told him she believed Hemsworth was the children's father." Plus unschooling, unbathing, and more.
Plus: Universal child care polls well, DEI and generational dynamics, and more...
From birthright citizenship to tariffs, many of the president’s key policies run counter to the Constitution’s original meaning.
Plus: Chile elects a right-winger, Jimmy Lai gets convicted, midair collision narrowly averted, and more...
So concludes the Louisiana Supreme Court, though my sense is that other courts may well have decided this differently.
"[The coach's alleged statement] can reasonably be inferred as ... defamatory ... about Clary—that Clary himself was greedy and only interested in money and, as a result, abandoned [his] team and refused to play for Penn State."
The court concluded that a retraction likely wouldn't breach any publication contract, and that under the circumstances a temporary restraining order would be especially unjustified given the publisher's First Amendment rights.
As traditional gathering places disappear, market-based funding could expand parks, courts, and other spaces that help people reconnect without raising taxes.
The country's transition leader was selected not at the ballot box but on a 100,000-person Discord chat.
Most ICE arrestees are nonviolent or have no criminal convictions at all.
Which is what progressive fans of antitrust want, no?
A federal lawsuit argues that the agency's policy of perusing travelers' personal data without a warrant or probable cause violates the Fourth Amendment.
But the real goal is to speed up removals, despite ongoing due process violations.
The move is bad for free speech and bad for American businesses that depend on tourism.
The Justice Department's litigation positions are at odds with its avowed intent to protect Second Amendment rights.
Rev. Stephen Josoma of St. Susanna Parish defended the message against the Trump administration's immigration enforcement.
Sarah McLaughlin reveals how foreign governments pressure American universities through speech codes and satellite campuses, and examines the broader threat international authoritarianism poses to free expression.
But there's a silver lining—sort of.
Calling suspected cocaine smugglers "combatants" does not justify summarily executing them.
So holds a Fifth Circuit panel, over a dissent. Note that part of the majority's rationale is that the photo would only violate the statute if the prosecution can show that defendant intended to invade privacy in a way "highly offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities."
So far, by the president's reckoning, he has prevented 650,000 U.S. drug deaths—eight times the number recorded last year.
Department of Homeland Security
The party in power changes. The pressure to silence critics doesn’t.
From the "Gitlow v. New York at 100" symposium, held this year at the Arizona State University Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law.
It's not surprising that the NRA and other Second Amendment advocates spoke out against a trans firearm ban floated by the Trump administration.
I wrote it (with help from others) on behalf of the Cato Institute and a group of takings and property scholars.
The prosecutors argue that sentencing based on unconvicted—or even uncharged—conduct doesn't violate due process.
The footage shows what happened to the survivors of the September 2 attack that inaugurated the president's deadly campaign against suspected drug boats.
The document remains remarkably resilient, even as Republicans and Democrats keep launching assaults on liberty.
In her 1962 essay "Have Gun, Will Nudge," Rand foresaw how government officials would seek to silence people they don't like.
One claim is that CMU's Chief Diversity Officer illegally recorded meeting with student and the accused professor—and then apparently "asserted her Fifth Amendment rights when ... asked her if she did so or if she had a pattern or practice of recording student meetings, without their consent, in the scope of her duties."
The commander who ordered a second missile strike worried that the helpless men he killed might be able to salvage cocaine from the smoldering wreck.
You don't have to like the Muslim Brotherhood or the Council on American-Islamic Relations to think the government should be required to prove accusations before punishing people.
From the "Gitlow v. New York at 100" symposium, held this year at the Arizona State University Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law; other papers from that symposium will be published shortly.
Adm. Frank M. Murphy reportedly told lawmakers a controversial second strike was necessary because drugs on the burning vessel remained a threat.
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