Latest in First Amendment
The Eleventh Circuit’s ruling provides important guidance to legislators working on social media laws, but the most important takeaway is the vindication of a consumer protection approach to social media content moderation.
The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion striking down most of Florida’s controversial social media law mostly gets the First Amendment right but also shortchanges the important government interests at stake.
Washington Governor Jay Inslee's support for a bill that “would outlaw attempts by candidates and elected officials to spread lies about free and fair elections when it has the likelihood to stoke violence” raises substantial First Amendment problems.
Despite hours of oral argument, the district court did not signal whether attempts to hold former President Trump and others civilly liable for encouraging the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol will succeed.
States have recently passed laws targeting a range of protest actions. How exactly do these statutes work and what constitutional questions do they raise?
Courts should prioritize the First Amendment rights of users, not technology giants.
At what point does informal coercion raise Constitutional questions?
A federal judge was right to block Florida’s social media law. But that doesn’t mean the First Amendment bars all government regulation of platform content-moderation decisions.
In their motions to dismiss Rep. Bennie Thompson’s suit, Trump, Giulani and the Oath Keepers defend their conduct on Jan. 6.
Republican Governor Ron DeSantis has promised that Florida will soon enact “the most ambitious reforms yet proposed” for “holding ‘Big Tech’ accountable.” There’s just one problem: It’s unconstitutional.