Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A U.S. law against Chinese-owned TikTok evokes the censorship regimes put in place by the United States' authoritarian enemies, free-speech advocates told the Supreme Court on Friday. In an amicus ...
The Supreme Court justices sounded highly skeptical Friday of Tik Tok's free-speech defense, signaling they are not likely to strike down the law that could shut down the popular video site the ...
During colonial times, English speech regulations were rather restrictive.The English criminal common law of seditious libel made criticizing the government a crime. Lord Chief Justice John Holt, writing in 1704–1705, explained the rationale for the prohibition: "For it is very necessary for all governments that the people should have a good opinion of it."
A ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court this month has dealt a blow to a prominent free speech law in Tennessee, First Amendment experts say. ... 2019 Tennessee Public Participation Act, which ...
Cases that consider the First Amendment implications of payments mandated by the state going to use in part for speech by third parties Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) Communications Workers of America v. Beck (1978) Chicago Local Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986) Keller v. State Bar of California (1990) Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass'n ...
Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, false statements of fact, and commercial ...
The law provides broad immunity for people who are sued when they speak out on matters of public concern. Opinion: Pennsylvania's new law 'SLAPPs' back at frivolous suits over free speech Skip to ...
The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v.