A couple of posts prompted by an error (since corrected) in an article that cited our brief.
"At a time when hate and bias incidents are on the rise, it is crucial that the state not remove these types of prohibitions that deter or punish this unacceptable behavior."
How the press learned to stop worrying and love censorship.
What’s at stake in United States v. Sineneng-Smith.
A clear constitutional violation.
Ohio University's Radical Students Could Have Ignored Kaitlin Bennett. Instead, They Threw Liquids At Her.
The mob strategy is morally and practically flawed.
The lawsuit had been filed against the University of Colorado; the Scheduling Order, which the professor had sought to seal, referred to allegations of improper conduct on the professor's part.
In Janus, the Court rejected requirements that government employees pay dues to unions; now the question before the Court is whether this applies to mandatory bar membership (and bar dues).
"The district court should not be a party to concealing this information from the public, especially as it concerns an arbitration organization that holds itself out to the public as impartial. These documents would be useful to the public in evaluating the true extent to which the organization is impartial."
"Judge Who Sealed Documents Relating to Her Home in Beach Community Gets Reversed by Appellate Court"
An update on that Connecticut unsealing case.
Georgia Can't Compel School Speakers To Promise They Won't Boycott Israel, Argues New Federal Lawsuit
Plus: Sanders tops Biden in new national poll, how federal housing policy is getting families evicted, and more...
(and perhaps to other government records).
Four Second Circuit judges gave fair use victories (separately) to rapper Drake and blogger Sargon of Akkad, concluding that defendants' uses of plaintiffs' work to comment on it and criticize it were fair use and thus not copyright infringement.
Plus: Maybe Buttigieg didn't win Iowa? Vermont considers decriminalizing prostitution. Customs and Border Protection gets a status change. And more...
Episode 10 of Free Speech Rules, a video series by UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh
"We need to stop this generation of big tech companies from profiting off of lies to the American people," the candidate told PEN America.
What’s at stake in Michigan v. Wood
A clear First Amendment violation, I think -- but it's the law in Tennessee.
GOP attacks on internet smut are heating up, but the porn industry has more practical threats to worry about.
The attempted muzzling of the former national security advisor is dubious.
When politicians call to punish “disinformation,” we should worry about what that definition encompasses.
Erroneous predictions of violence at the Richmond rally conflated civil libertarians with militant racists.
That's the logical implication of a recent Second Circuit panel decision (though one involving a non-journalist).
Plus: Clinton says "nobody likes" Bernie, Biden wants Section 230 revoked, Iran takes responsibility for Jan. 8 plane crash, and more...
A new story from Fox 11 (L.A.).
Biden tells the New York Times he would revoke Section 230 protections and hold Facebook (and other sites) liable for their content.
"On the record before the Court, the movants have demonstrated 'sufficiently serious questions going to the merits to make them a fair ground for litigation.'"
The city limits busking to its tiny Theater District, and it makes you jump through hoops even to play there.
This is the case where two students were shouting "nigger" loudly when walking by UConn dorms; the students are trying to block university discipline based on their speech, including their eviction from student housing.
"The public may well have an interest in how litigation is funded by third parties," the judge concludes. A law firm and two litigation finance companies are disputing (among other things) whether the litigation finance agreements are illegally usurious.
By complaining to Yale about Bandy Lee's violation of the Goldwater Rule, Dershowitz lets her portray herself as a brave dissident.
Episode 9 of Free Speech Rules, a video series by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh
So a New Jersey tax court held last week, in a case brought by prominent bank founder Vernon W. Hill.
Asheen Phansey's was responding to President Trump's threat to bomb Iranian cultural sites.
There's also more to the case, which was brought over statements made on a local TV broadcast while Morrissey was unsuccessfully running for Richmond Mayor. (He is now a state senator, elected in November.)