No First Amendment Exception for Professional-Client Speech: States Can't Ban "Conversion Therapy" Speech for Minors
So the Supreme Court held today.
So the Supreme Court held today.
It argues that the right to use property is central to both the value of property rights generally, and the property rights protected by the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
Plus: Hollywood is over, the war in Iran is not, Democrats are fighting about affordability, and more...
Understanding the stakes in Trump v. Barbara.
She spent nearly six months in jail.
The jurors concluded that the officers violated the Fourth and 14th amendments when they seized a 14-year-old without evidence that she was in danger.
Plus: the Facebook verdicts, porn star chatbots, facial recognition gone awry, drag queen regulation, and more…
Judge Rita Lin's preliminary injunction confirms what government officials had implicitly acknowledged: The supply chain risk designation was punishment, not policy.
The case could give the Court a chance to clarify what a "closely regulated" business is and what constitutional protections it enjoys.
Two different pieces of legislation aim to create state workarounds to the procedural quagmire of federal civil rights litigation.
Not the misconduct itself, but noted in the court's opinion as one of the items plaintiff had sought to withhold from discovery: "During a separate text conversation on May 11, 2018, Plaintiff texted Mr. Roe: 'If I had 5 dollars for every gender, I would have 5 dollars coz women are objects.'"
The president is much less concerned about the law's potential for overreach now that he's in charge of the government wielding it.
Total anonymity plus revenue sharing seems to be rewarding extremely low-quality posting.
He sued over a claim that he "associated with Nazis" and "tried to have Vice President Pence attend a white supremacist event while he was on an overseas trip."
Plus: Meta and Google found liable, what the verdict means, an OnlyFans-style campaign website, and more...
Colorado lawmakers are considering a bill that would make it illegal to broadcast sports betting ads between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m.
His breach of contract and race discrimination claims, however, are dismissed.
Despite its rejection of the Biden administration's interference, the Trump administration is still asserting authority over online speech.
Meta's loss in a New Mexico "product design" case could also be a blow against Section 230, free speech, and online privacy.
Plus: Trump declares victory over Iran again, Afroman trial reflections, and more...
Most matters enjoy too little moral agreement to make fertile ground for government intervention.
The justice dissented from the Supreme Court's denial of a petition from a Texas journalist who was charged with felonies for practicing journalism.
The podcast is M. Gessen’s story about cousin Allen Gessen (who is the plaintiff in this case) and his murder-for-hire conviction. Extra juicy tidbit in this case: Venue!
The lawsuit alleges that the city has a history of silencing pro-Palestine speech.
The court's reasoning mostly turns on a conclusion that much of the prison behavior that plaintiffs complained about wasn't dictated by that particular law.
Plus: the real legacy of Cesar Chavez, blue state tax policies are driving out wealth, and a jury clears Afroman in a free speech case.
The Justice largely agrees with Fifth Circuit Judge James Ho's dissenting opinion below, but writes alone in dissenting from the Supreme Court's decision not to consider the case.
"[T]he materials at issue concern the conduct of public officials acting in their official capacities, which substantially diminishes any cognizable privacy interest and weighs against restriction."
"We are not in the mood to discuss the matter further, and have not been in the mood for 250 years."
From a termination of parental rights decision by the Ohio Court of Appeals.
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