Journal of Free Speech Law: "Government Counterspeech," by Prof. Jamal Greene
The third of twelve articles from the Knight Institute’s Lies, Free Speech, and the Law symposium.
The third of twelve articles from the Knight Institute’s Lies, Free Speech, and the Law symposium.
But lawsuits for libeling the government do not "have any place in the American system of jurisprudence."
"It's just an effort to keep everybody safe and make sure nobody has any ill will," he claimed.
Plus: Gun detection in the subway system, Toronto's rainwater tax, goat wet nurses, and more...
I'm against it, whomever it's coming from.
The first of twelve articles from the Knight Institute’s Lies, Free Speech, and the Law symposium.
But plaintiff's claim that he was retaliated against for raising religious objections to the training, and discriminated against based on religion as to promotion, can go forward.
The psychologist and bestselling author argues that Harvard's free speech policy was so "selectively prosecuted that it became a national joke."
Plus: Vanderbilt activists' 911 call, Kevorkianniversary, MAID problems, and more...
“Even open democracies have implemented restrictive measures,” finds a global report.
Where these laws allow squatters to occupy houses without the owner's consent, they qualify as takings of private property that require payment of compensation under the Fifth Amendment.
under California statutes that protect private employees' political activity; the plaintiff claimed that "[s]he listened to speeches being made and walked to the Capitol, and then she left," and "did not participate in any rioting."
Prof. Hamburger continues to conflate coercion and voluntary choice.
Round 3 in the debate between Hamburger and Somin over the First Amendment and Murthy
This used to be possible under the old "alienation of affections" tort, but all but a handful of states have abolished it, and the tortious inducement of breach of contract tort can't fill that gap.
Live commentary on the Supreme Court oral argument in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
The threshold issue in today's oral argument is Article III standing, and that issue should be determinative.
It only took a generation to go from ration cards to exporting electronics.
Prof. Hamburger is wrong to argue that the use of the word "abridgment" implies that noncoercive government persuasion directed at social media firms violates the First Amendment.
The law would require platforms to use invasive measures to prevent most teenagers under 16 from making social media accounts and bar all minors from sexually explicit sites.
Legislators are taking a page from constitutionally dubious state laws that make carry permits highly impractical to use.
Texas is wrong to equate illegal migration and drug smuggling with invasion. If accepted by courts, the argument would set a dangerous precedent.
Modern cars are smartphones on wheels, but with less protection for your data.
Florida appellate courts are pretty good about reversing unconstitutional injunctions against speech (though Florida trial courts seem to be pretty willing to enter such injunctions).
And in the process, it will stifle innovation and competition.
Two class-action lawsuits say Michigan counties take cuts of the exorbitant costs of inmate phone calls while children go months without seeing their parents in person.
The state's position is at odds with the text and original meaning of the Constitution and would set a dangerous precedent if accepted by federal courts.
The lottery winner is suing an ex-girlfriend based on a non-disclosure agreement aimed at concealing his identity. (The intervention, at this point, is aimed at just unsealing various sealed documents in the case, not at disclosing the parties' names.)
Tucson and Pima County have a history of passing restrictions that conflict with state law.
Protests in the country come from an understandable place. But their demands are divorced from certain unfortunate economic realities.
U.S. prosecutors are looking to wriggle out of an espionage trial for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
"Mayors should not be allowed to launder animus through warrants," the former city council member's lawyer told the justices.
The officers are avoiding accountability after getting qualified immunity.
at least when the license requires 6000 hours of training on matters far removed from his expertise.
and so can the professor's Title VII and Title IX discrimination claims against the university.
Some supposed defenders of the right to bear arms react with alarm.
Hours before the president said "no one should be jailed" for marijuana use, his Justice Department was saying no one who uses marijuana should be allowed to own guns.
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