Trump's Threats Against Musk and Newsom Reflect an Authoritarian Intolerance of Dissent
Even if the president was joking in both cases, he already has used his powers to punish people whose views offend him.
Even if the president was joking in both cases, he already has used his powers to punish people whose views offend him.
Law enforcement seized Robert Reeves' Chevrolet Camaro without charging him with a crime. After he filed a class-action lawsuit, that changed.
The result is the same: attacks on tech companies and attempts to violate Americans' rights.
Karoline Leavitt's threat against ABC News is an attack on free speech.
Sen. Blackburn introduced a bill this week that would make it a crime to publish the name of a federal law enforcement officer.
A federal court in Florida will consider whether chatbot output is First Amendment-protected speech.
The fight against anti-Semitism is undermined when it is conflated with mere criticism of Israel's government.
As the prosecution rests in the OneTaste case, the defense lays out the free speech implications if the government succeeds.
Signaling legislative contempt, one sponsor called the student groups "sex clubs." But in targeting the content of student speech the bill probably infringes First Amendment free speech rights and tramples the Equal Access Act of 1984
Olympus Spa had sued on First Amendment grounds.
A new law prohibits the state from requiring nonprofits to disclose the personal information of their supporters, protecting Americans’ First Amendment right to free association.
The Lone Star State's bill is already facing legal challenges.
Reason confirmed reports of dysfunction and violence at one of those detention centers earlier this week.
Marco Rubio has announced a plan to deny visas to foreigners who censor Americans.
Speech codes intended to battle misinformation are instead empowering the government to be the arbiter of truth.
A Massachusetts 7th grader was sent home for wearing the shirt, though the school allows students to challenge the idea it conveyed.
Trump is wielding the state against a school whose politics he doesn't like.
The president's crusade against attorneys whose work offends him, which defies the First Amendment and undermines the right to counsel, has provoked several judicial rebukes.
While there is no constitutional right to receive grants, the Constitution does bar grant conditions that undermine constitutional rights.
Mark Meador thinks the Federal Trade Commission may have the legal right to investigate nonprofits that “advocate for the interests of giant corporations” if they don’t disclose their donors.
On Monday, the court granted an emergency injunction allowing Rep. Laurel Libby to resume voting and speaking after she was censured for a post criticizing trans women in women's sports.
In the name of "restoring freedom of speech," FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson wants to override the editorial judgments of social media platforms.
Volokh's view gave breathing room for individuals' speech interests while leaving plenty of space for government to protect people from discrimination
Conway, New Hampshire's attempt to force a local bakery to take down the mural "does not withstand any level of constitutional scrutiny," a judge ruled this week.
For nearly three years, Daniel Horwitz faced contempt of court for talking about a private prison that was one of his most frequent courtroom opponents.
A lot of conservatives are falling prey to the same snowflakery they criticize.
Nominees include stories on inflation breaking brains, America's first drug war, Afghans the U.S. left behind, Javier Milei, and much more.
A new bill would ban sharing visual content that might "arouse" or "titillate."
The ruling is a victory for the proposition that the First Amendment applies to immigration and visa restrictions.
The Harvard psychologist discusses recent gains for free speech at Harvard, growing political and ideological threats to academic freedom, and the importance of shared knowledge in sustaining truth and progress.
The IGO Anti-Boycott Act would dramatically expand U.S. anti-boycott laws. The House quietly postponed a vote after running into unexpected Republican opposition.
Earlier this year, state Rep. Laurel Libby made a post criticizing trans women in women's sports. Her refusal to apologize has cost Libby her right to speak on the House floor and vote on legislation.
Campus protests against Israel have revived debates over the limits of First Amendment protections.
A U.S. district judge called Mohsen Mahdawi’s detention a “great harm to a person who has been charged with no crime.”
"It is unthinkable that a person in a free society could be snatched from the street, imprisoned, and threatened with deportation for expressing an opinion the government dislikes," says FIRE.
Congress just approved a new online censorship scheme under the auspices of thwarting revenge porn and AI-generated "nonconsensual intimate visual depictions."
The administration's lawyers claim that this was justified by Khalil's likelihood of escape.
Two of his targets are seeking permanent injunctions against the president's blatantly unconstitutional executive orders.
To remain independent, institutions of higher education should end their reliance on taxpayer money.
The president has launched a multifaceted crusade against speech that offends him.
The administration's demands extend far beyond its avowed concern about antisemitism and enforcement of "civil rights laws."
The president's lawyers also conflate fraud with defamation, misconstrue the commercial speech doctrine, and assert that false speech is not constitutionally protected.
The boy and his mother are now suing the school district and its officials to protect students' right to free expression.
Support for suppressing "violent content" has also dropped.
The secretary of state, who aims to "liberate American speech," nevertheless wants to deport U.S. residents for expressing opinions that offend him.
Just a quarter of respondents said they favored deporting students for "expressing pro-Palestine views."
Apparently freezing $2 billion in federal funding wasn't enough.
Harvard's law faculty previously criticized the Obama administration's assault on norms of free speech and due process.