What's on your mind?
and continuing the conduct while following those employees."
In this, the court agrees with the Florida Attorney General and the Governor’s office, and disagrees with the challengers who are trying to get the statute struck down on First Amendment grounds.
Two public university professors were disciplined for posting fliers saying a colleague was racist, and that a student group (Turning Point USA) was a racist "national hate group" with "ties to white supremacy."
The government alleges that Nikhil Gupta was involved in a "plot, directed by an employee of the Indian government, to target and assassinate a U.S. citizen for his support of the Sikh separatist movement in India."
So holds a federal court, also concluding that earlier sexual discussions could likewise justify restriction in the open public comment period (treated by the law as a “limited public forum,” in which reasonable and viewpoint-neutral restrictions are constitutional).
An early article from what will eventually be several on Information as Medicine.
A California trial court so ruled, and the California Court of Appeal just upheld that decision.
"of prescription medication, search her bag without permission, and find a firearm inside? And what happens when school board officials find out and want to question the perpetrator? Has the Fourth Amendment been transgressed?"
The sanctions were imposed against Mark Finchem, "the Republican Party nominee for Arizona Secretary of State, [who] lost the November 8, 2022, election by more than 120,000 votes," and his lawyer.
One of several interesting questions that arises in a case involving regulations of pregnancy centers that seek to help pregnant women without offering abortions or abortion counseling.
"Philologists may quibble, but who can deny / that 'Dean' and 'Don' are just a vowel away?"
The underlying methodological debate might also bear on free speech disputes more broadly.
"Young proffered CNN messages and emails that showed internal concern about the completeness and veracity of the reporting—the story is 'a mess,' 'incomplete,' not 'fleshed out for digital,' 'the story is 80% emotion, 20% obscured fact,' and 'full of holes like Swiss cheese.'"
The case involved a public records request to identify the "six or seven pretty big legal conservative heavyweights" whom Gov. DeSantis labeled as "trusted advisors for his judicial appointments to the Florida Supreme Court."
The court concludes the pastor's posts were about the activists' organization (Oklahomans for Equality) and not about them personally; it thus avoided having to decide whether the First Amendment would have protected the speech if it was indeed about the activists personally.
An article from the Defamation: Philosophical and Legal Perspectives symposium, sponsored by the Center for Legal Philosophy at UC Irvine.
An article from the Defamation: Philosophical and Legal Perspectives symposium, sponsored by the Center for Legal Philosophy at UC Irvine.
"[T]he only support for Defendant's statements about Plaintiff is that Defendant's 'spiritual investigation' into the murders using 'intuitive tarot readings' led her to Plaintiff."
Yes, when the restriction is being imposed by the government.
An article from the Defamation: Philosophical and Legal Perspectives symposium, sponsored by the Center for Legal Philosophy at UC Irvine.
An article from the Defamation: Philosophical and Legal Perspectives symposium, sponsored by the Center for Legal Philosophy at UC Irvine.
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
