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
Court Vacates "Stalking … Protective Order" Entered Against Critic of Elected Official
The official argued, among other things, that defendant's speech constituted "words of incitement" intended "to rile up the Black community to attack [her]."
Injunction Ordering Citizens Not to Mention Coroner in Online Posts (and Barring Them From Possessing Weapons)
An Ohio trial court issued the injunction, but the Ohio Court of Appeals has just set it aside.
Free Speech Unmuted: Moody v. Netchoice and Murthy v. Missouri
Jane Bambauer and I quickly run down what happened in these two cases (both of which involved First Amendment challenges and social media).
Justice Thomas Argues the Court Should at Some Point Consider Whether "Assault Weapons" Bans Violate Second Amendment
Justice Alito takes a similar view, but, at least in this case, this view didn't get the four votes necessary to grant review.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch Argue Court Should Review Scope of 47 U.S.C. § 230 Immunity
But, at least in this case, this view didn't get the four votes necessary to grant review.
Ohio S. Ct. Vacates Order Sealing Documents at Defendant's Behest in Alleged Child Rape Case
The defendant had alleged that he, his family, and his lawyer had been threatened by the public, but the Ohio Supreme Court concluded that the trial court wasn't given adequate evidence to justify sealing.
Allowing "Black Lives Matter" Signs in Classrooms But Forbidding "All Lives Matter"/"Blue Lives Matter" Might Violate First Amendment
So holds the Eighth Circuit, concluding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently alleged that the "Black Lives Matter" signs were private speech, rather than government speech.
If Pseudonyms, Then What Kind? How About "Doe WHBE 3"?
Should pseudonymous litigants, and any precedents set in their cases, be known by the initials of the law firms that represent them?
Federal Low-Security Inmate Punished Based on Public TikTok Video Showing Him Making Contraband Lobster
"Petitioner was identified in a public TikTok video made with a contraband cellphone showing him and several other inmates preparing, cooking, or eating contraband food inside a low-security federal prison camp."
Court Strikes Down Arkansas Town Limit on Signature Gathering at Town Festival
The Town of Rose Bud restriction appears aimed at a particular proposed constitutional amendment, which would "require all schools receiving public funds to meet identical standards and would require universal access to pre-K education."
Monday Open Thread
What's on your mind?
No First Amendment Protection for "Shouting into a Bullhorn and Blaring the Bullhorn's Siren as Close as Three Feet from Government Employees …
and continuing the conduct while following those employees."
Florida S. Ct. Reads Florida Anti-Riot Statute as Narrowly Focused on Violence
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.
Professors Lacked First Amendment Right to Post Flyers Calling Colleague and Student Group Racist
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."
"Indian National" Extradited "in Connection with Foiled Plot to Assassinate U.S. Citizen" for Citizen's Sikh Separatist Advocacy
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."
Shouting "Chick with a Dick" "Multiple Times" at City Council Meeting Was Disruptive, Could Justify Ejection
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).
