Pennsylvania Officer Tases Suspect in the Back Because He Didn't Cross His Ankles Quickly Enough
"Oh come on, bruh. You're really going to tase him? He was sitting down. That's crazy. That's why I record everything."
"Oh come on, bruh. You're really going to tase him? He was sitting down. That's crazy. That's why I record everything."
Emmanuel Macron wants teens to "value" their citizenship. Milton Friedman would be appalled.
"This is not what the hate crime statute was for. This is criminalizing pure speech, and that violates the First Amendment."
Forget coat-hangers and back alleys. The future of illegal abortions is online pharmaceuticals.
The retiring justice seems to have been a crucial obstacle to hearing Second Amendment cases.
The question that the Court didn't resolve in Lozman v. Riviera-Beach is back, in another case on which the Supreme Court just granted review.
Officers in riot gear made their move Thursday in an attempt to reopen Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters in Portland.
Pets shouldn't be treated as contraband.
"If an employee's speech is about, in, and directed to the workplace, she has no 'possibility of a First Amendment claim,'" say the dissenters -- but that's not what the First Amendment caselaw says.
In one surveillance video, the victim is tased four times for a total of 50 seconds.
"The majority's view, if taken literally, could radically change prior law," warn the Court's liberal justices.
Under Obama the ATF admitted that Congress denied it authority to ban bump-fire stocks on AR-15s, but now the ban seems imminent.
States that want to allow public sector unions, and avoid "free-rider" problems, should still be able to do that -- just by paying unions directly, rather than via compelled agency fees.
Comparing the records of two right-of-center justices.
A decade after recognizing a constitutional right to armed self-defense, the Supreme Court remains reluctant to defend it.
A poorly written proposal to expand copyright claims could potentially decimate online sharing of information.
Today's Supreme Court decision adds to the law -- and the uncertainty -- about when the First Amendment bans the government from requiring speech.
President David Cole says guidelines "are explicitly designed to help affiliates and national staff think through various factors in case selection decisions."
Will widespread private arms rebalance power between individuals and the state? It looks like we're going to find out.
David Cole and Nadine Strossen had responded to Kaminer's op-ed on this; Kaminer responds in turn.
Washington State told to revisit ruling against Arlene's Flowers.
It is well-established that everyone within the United States, even those who may have entered illegally or over-stayed a visa, are entitled to Due Process.
Is the ACLU becoming less committed to protecting free speech, especially speech that some view as "imped[ing] progress toward equality"?
In a case involving cellphone location data, Gorsuch says entrusting information to someone does not mean surrendering your Fourth Amendment rights.
SCOTUS rejects warrantless cellphone location tracking in Carpenter v. United States.
"If I do go to court and get wrongfully convicted, my whole life is ruined."
What today's decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair might tell us about the future of qualified immunity
"Our defense of speech may have a greater or lesser harmful impact on the equality and justice work to which we are also committed."
Improving smuggling efforts isn't ideal, but it's better than just watching kids get torn from their families.
The dangers of government surveillance.
Matt Kibbe explains why "beer is freedom," and talks about his new documentary series with Rep. Thomas Massie, Off the Grid.
It all began with a jurisdictional dispute over an Egyptian divorce proceeding and a New York divorce proceeding.
Frivolous defamation lawsuits undermine the First Amendment.
Very narrow decisions -- or decisions not to decide -- in some more of the Supreme Court's most watched cases.
No, says the Illinois Appellate Court.
Clinch seeks "an apology," "an undertaking from you not to post anti-trans or vilifying posts in future, and to remove those that are currently on your public Facebook profile," "a further undertaking from you to remove any anti trans and vilifying posts made by other people from your public profile," and "for you to participate in training about vilification, and trans' issues."
Law enforcement is upset, but data security is vital to prevent crimes.
New York's governor favors "extreme risk protection orders" that could be obtained by a wide range of people based on little evidence.
A big win for First Amendment advocates in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky.
But a more precise ban on clothing in polling places (which the Court treats as "nonpublic fora") that mentions candidates, parties, or ballot measures may be constitutional.
Federal Judge Raymond Moore applies strict scrutiny to a system with the power to restrict political speech and finds it unreasonable to outsource that power to anyone and everyone.
My first foray into podcasting here at Reason, a discussion with Reason editor Katherine Mangu-Ward.
Once again, lawmakers propose to use the regulatory state to punish people they don't like.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10