The statute in that case was a funding condition on federal money given to universities -- but the Court's decision held that the government could impose the same rule categorically, whether or not the universities got funds.
I'd love to have people's comments this week, since I owe the journal a final draft Saturday the 24th. [UPDATE: Just to be clear, the article aims to provide a coherent framework for understanding the current precedents, not to come up with new rules from scratch.]
Cases in which a majority of the Court fell down on the job.
While Swalwell insists it was 'sarcasm' it's bad form to reply to a citizen aggrieved at openly threatening constitutional rights connected with self and civil defense with implied threat of mass murder.
The latest trial balloon from the perennial White House Hamlet contains more lead than the paint of a New York public school.
What should the culture of free speech, free expression, and ownership look like on our social media platforms?
Cross-examination, stricter definition of misconduct, and greater flexibility
Plus: the NRA versus New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and CNN versus the White House
The latest in the Brummer v. Wey (TheBlot) litigation, brought by Prof. Christopher Brummer, a former Obama nominee for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
"Any other result would have undermined the free speech and academic freedom rights of all Rutgers faculty members."
Believe it or not, authorities can maintain the peace while also respecting the First Amendment.
Plus: Trump endorses sentencing reform and Bitcoin's value continues to fall.
Justice Anthony Kennedy's bogus 2002 claim figures prominently in defenses of an Arizona bail ban.
A link to my review of an important new book on property rights by Cornell law Professor Gregory Alexander.
The porn wars haven't died, they're just packaged differently.
More than 50 years later, it is a wheezing, arthritic artifact of more optimistic times.
Social media can shame them and the school can punish them, but the police shouldn't intervene.
But what does that mean? Readers, tell me what you think, and how it fits with your general theory of constitutional interpretation (e.g., textualism, originalism, etc.).
... extends to public high school students, holds a federal judge in Wisconsin.
So reports the Times of London, which was the target of the purported order.
An interesting motion for a temporary restraining order, arguing based on the First Amendment, the dormant Commerce Clause, 47 U.S.C. § 230, and more.
Sessions was a staunch critic of consent decrees that forced police departments to reform unconstitutional practices.
The state has some of the nation's strictest firearm laws.
Whether it's Tucker Carlson or Don Lemon, violent threats are the wrong way to go.
The organization's lawsuit against New York's governor survives a motion to dismiss.
Outcoming Gov. Jerry Brown was no gun rights advocate, but if Newsom's voting record is any indication, he's likely to be even worse.
New York's governor is violating the First Amendment by pressuring banks and insurers to shun "gun promotion organizations."
The difference between exercising one's 2nd Amendment right and "looking very threatening and intimidating."
The NRA alleges that New York officials are trying to pressure banks and insurance companies not to deal with the NRA, because of the NRA's political activities.
The Supreme Court's call for supplemental briefing in Frank v. Gaos will lead it to a difficult question.
It just makes sense to let jurors know about their already established power to exercise discretion over bad laws and ill-considered prosecutions.
Banning ballot selfies to stop voter fraud is like "burning down the house to roast the pig" said the First Circuit Court of Appeals. But many states still do it.
"Once a matter is brought before a court for resolution, it is no longer solely the parties' case, but also the public's case."
Social media execs did themselves no favors by becoming so closely identified with the Democratic Party.
Trump's comments are not the same as the Nigerian Army's actions. But regardless of the nation, shooting protesters is bad.
Arkansas Supreme Court Justice Courtney Goodson was trying to block ads that criticized her and allegedly defamed her.
Jim Rutenberg's indictment of "the Incitement Industry" charges right-wing provocateurs with complicity in violence.
Anti-hate speech laws have gone too far.
Plus: New details on federal bullying of banks, a new fight over nutrition advice, and new migrant mania from President Trump
University Police issued a warning even after admitting that the student did nothing wrong.
The New York Times continues to push the myth that there is something uniquely deadly about the guns Dianne Feinstein wants to ban.
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 thanks
Every 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 interested
So 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 thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks