Facebook Had Every Right to Reject Elizabeth Warren's Crappy Ad
Nobody in the media should be supporting an elected official trying to control what speech online platforms allow.
Nobody in the media should be supporting an elected official trying to control what speech online platforms allow.
If your client has been ordered not to say things about someone, here are the precedents supporting your right to an expedited appeal.
There's no room for errors and online platforms face huge fines, likely encouraging overly broad takedowns.
"I'm more confused than angry about all of this."
Backdoors into your texts and private message provide far more information than your phone metadata.
Clearly unconstitutional, of course.
An interesting decision called United States v. Suppressed.
Another court opinion reinforces this principle -- even if repetition of libelous statements can be forbidden after a trial on the merits at which the statements are found libelous, it can't be preliminarily enjoined before such a trial.
Meet the undergrad who is recovering the legacy of gay, socialist civil-rights activist Bayard Rustin while explicating Kanye West's conservatism.
Pervasive real-time police surveillance is not just theoretical anymore.
Plus: Facebook says it's pivoting to privacy, and congressional Democrats want to "save the internet."
They're just helping the TSA push its scaremongering narrative.
Universities should be proactive about articulating, defending and protecting the free exchange of ideas on campus
If universities do not take steps to address their campus free speech problems, politicians will do it for them
Both sides agree to stand down. First Amendment precedents were on the baker's side.
For years, security state advocates fought to maintain the authority to snoop on your phone records. Are they really giving up?
Police allegedly shoved a photographer to the ground with a baton as well.
We were told this sort of spying would only be used to stop terrorists. And yet...
Following the lead of their rebellious constituents, local officials say they won't enforce despised rules.
Due Process Concerns Abound
Even for conservatives who believe in individualism, group identity trumps all.
"Google and Facebook should not be a law unto themselves. They should not be able to discriminate against conservatives."
When absurd ghost stories are passed off as actual journalism
Yes, said an Ohio Court of Appeals majority opinion, reasoning that the speaker's past speech "was not engaged in for a legitimate reason, but instead for an illegitimate reason born out of a vendetta seeking to cause mental distress to his mother and sister and to exact personal revenge." No, argue the EFF, Prof. Aaron Caplan, and I in a brief we've just filed with the Ohio Supreme Court.
Learning from Robert McNamara's mistakes and magnanimity
Fortunately, the California Court of Appeal has just reversed the decision, on First Amendment grounds.
Nick Gillespie is interviewed by Spiked's Brendan O'Neill about the Enlightenment, free speech, and crony capitalism.
Two bills dealing with background checks would criminalize innocent behavior and unjustly interfere with the exercise of Second Amendment rights.
Ronald Sullivan's choice of clients is "not only upsetting, but deeply trauma-inducing," according to activist students.
A lame headline provokes even lamer charges of incitement to violence.
We make a mistake when we think outliers somehow represent who we are as a country.
So holds the Kansas Court of Appeals, in reasoning that applies equally to any clothing that displays a message; the defendant in this particular case was on trial for setting fire to a truck that was displaying Confederate flags.
So a federal district court in Washington just concluded, about a Washington statute that criminalized "anonymous or repeated" speech intended "to harass, ... torment, or embarrass."
After a harm reduction advocate slammed a hardy but misleading factoid, users who retweeted his message complained that they had been shadowbanned.
"Encouraging violence"
A teenager wrongly accused of harassing a Native American activist sues The Washington Post for $250 million.
But what she did wasn't actually illegal.
Please share it widely -- there will be at least nine more in the upcoming months.
Sex, publishing, and quasi-legal theft collide in the Backpage prosecution.
The problem isn't a lack of laws, but poor implementation of those laws.
First Amendment limitations on libel and other torts are complicated
Thomas thinks the Supreme Court may have erred in its 1964 NYT v. Sullivan ruling.
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