Eugene Volokh is the Thomas M. Siebel Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, and the Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Distinguished Research Professor at UCLA School of Law. Naturally, his posts here (like the opinions of the other bloggers) are his own, and not endorsed by any institution.
Eugene Volokh
Latest from Eugene Volokh
Thursday Open Thread
UPDATE: Sorry, inadvertently scheduled two threads for this morning; please post to the other one instead.
State Employer's Requiring Employees to Watch "Antiracist"/"Gender Identity" Videos Isn't Unconstitutional Speech Compulsion
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.
Free Speech Unmuted: Free Speech, Government Persuasion, and Government Coercion
Prof. Jane Bambauer and I discuss Murthy v. Missouri (the former Missouri v. Biden).
Private Employee's Claim That She Was Fired for Peacefully Attending Jan. 6 Events Can Go Forward,
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."
Can't Sue In-Laws for "Undermining" Marriage and Thus Tortiously Inducing Breach of Marriage Contract
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.
Florida Court Reverses Anti-Libel Injunction Entered During Discovery Dispute
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).
Court Allows Media to Intervene to Unseal Documents in Lottery Winner's Lawsuit
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.)
"Spam Private Eye" Can't Constitutionally Be Required to Get Real Private Eye License,
at least when the license requires 6000 hours of training on matters far removed from his expertise.
#TheyLied Libel Lawsuit Over Ex-Student's Allegations of Rape Can Go Forward,
and so can the professor's Title VII and Title IX discrimination claims against the university.
Justice Jackson Seems to Be Charting a More Speech-Restriction-Tolerant Approach
Justice Jackson, like Justice Breyer (whom she replaced and for whom she clerked), seems to be considering an approach that is more embracing of speech restrictions that she views as especially urgent—including perhaps ones that departs from precedents such as the Pentagon Papers case.
Murthy v. Missouri and Government Urging Platforms to Restrict Speech
The government can't block viewpoints it condemns from its own property that has been opened to publicspeech. Should there be limits on government systematically and substantially encouraging private entities to block the same viewpoints from their property—which may be much more important to public debate than the government property where speech remains free?
"Black Lives Mat[t]er" + "Any Life" Drawing "Not Protected by the First Amendment" in First Grade
Such speech can be found to be "impermissible harassment," the court says, partly because "deference to schoolteachers is especially appropriate today, where, increasingly, what is harmful or innocent speech is in the eye of the beholder."
Racially Discriminatory Enforcement Lawsuit Against Duluth Police Officer Can Go Forward
A black resident called the police to complain about alleged racial harassment by white neighbor; the resident alleges the police arrested him for leaving the scene after the police arrived, but didn't arrest the neighbor for doing the same thing.
Judge Orders Person to Stop Campaign of Criticizing Teenager Who Had Posted a Racial Slur When a Sophomore
The Indiana Court of Appeals, though, reverses the order, concluding the judge wasn't allowed to issue such an order on his own initiative; it doesn't decide whether such an order would violate the First Amendment.
S. Ct. Announces Test for When a Government Official's Social Media Posts Are "State Action"
This bears on when the official's comment deletion or blocking decisions may violate the First Amendment.
Thursday Open Thread
What's on your mind, other than the open thread being late today?
Lawsuit Against Society for Creative Anachronism Thrown Out Because It's Untimely
and also because private clubs generally have broad discretion in interpreting their internal rules.
Revenge Porn Dispute Can't Be Completely Sealed
The Fifth Circuit leaves room for possible retroactive pseudonymization of the case, however, though it doesn't decide for certain whether such retroactive pseudonymization is proper.
No Constitutional Violation in Mental Health Investigation Following Professor's Claim to Police About "Electronic Device[s]" Found in Her "Private Parts"
Part of the facts in an interesting recent case, dealing with plaintiff's claims that the police retaliated against her for exercising her First Amendment rights to report crime.
Telling Officials "You Will Live to Regret This" Wasn't Punishable Threat or "Intimidat[ion]"
when in context the statement just expressed "an intention to file a complaint against the conduct of government officials."
