Supreme Court Rules on Off-Campus Student Speech Rights in Mahanoy vs. B.L. Case
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a student's First Amendment rights for off-campus speech, but the Mahanoy decision left questions unanswered.
NCAC Files Supreme Court Brief in Case of Combat Veteran Charged with Harassment
NCAC has filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to hear the case of a combat veteran who was arrested after he swore at a Department of Veterans Affairs employee on the telephone.
Maine Bill Aims to Weaken Protection Against School Censorship | UPDATE: VICTORY!
Maine lawmaker's attempts to label educational material obscene threatens intellectual freedom.
Attempt to Ban “Obscene” Material in Maine Schools
Maine lawmaker's attempts to label educational material obscene threatens intellectual freedom.
NCAC Supports Prison Legal News in Fight Against Florida Department of Corrections
NCAC has joined with 17 other organizations in filing a brief with the US Supreme Court in the case of Prison Legal News v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.
Supreme Court Grants The Slants an Important First Amendment Victory
Given our current political climate we'd be wise not to take the protections afforded by the First Amendment for granted and to protest unconstitutional government action, as The Slants have successfully just done.
Band The Slants Take Case on Their Allegedly ‘Disparaging’ Name to Supreme Court
The Supreme Court will hear Lee v. Tam, a case involving a band that considers the rejection of its band name, The Slants, a free speech issue.
SCOTUS Bans Demonstrations on Grounds
The following post was written by NCAC's summer legal intern, Ryan Gander. Ryan is a current student at Columbia Law School. His interests include philosophy, civil liberties, science fiction, and video games. The Supreme Court has a troubled relationship with the First Amendment and that’s not even talking about what goes on in the courtroom. Since 1949, federal law has [...]
It’s About Time We Have “The Video Game Talk”
Last Monday the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to strike down a California law that banned the selling of violent video games to minors. The Supreme Court ruled that video games are allowed the same protection under the first amendment as books, plays, and movies. The ruling also distinguished the California statute from the Ginsburg vs. New York decision, in which [...]
Reassessing “Decency”
On Monday, June 27th, the Supreme Court announced that upon returning from its summer recess in October, it would revisit the Federal Communication Commission's rule that allows it to fine broadcasters for “indecency.” Last year, the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC was violating broadcasters' free-speech rights. The Court also stated that [...]
Moot Court Competition Examines Real Student Cyber-Speech Issues
David Hudson of the First Amendment Center is connecting the dots between the hypothetical case presented in the 2011 First Amendment Moot Court Competition (in which the College Of William and Mary Law School emerged victorious -- Go Tribe!) and the questions of freedom and accountability surrounding online speech facing administrators and communities around the country: Many questions remain in [...]
Update on Citizens United v. FEC: Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech
Earlier this year, we covered Citizens United v. FEC, a Supreme Court case on the constitutionality of federal election laws. As we explained in April, “the Court, among other things, needs to determine whether Hillary: The Movie, a 90 minute documentary about Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign with a decidedly conservative bias, is considered an “electioneering communication,” or a political editorial [...]
Sotomayor is confirmed: What does it mean for the First Amendment?
Judge Sonia Sotomayor was confirmed by the Senate today as the newest member of the Supreme Court, replacing Justice David H. Souter who retired in June. She becomes the 111th member of the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as the third woman and first Hispanic to serve on it. What does her confirmation mean for the First Amendment? See our [...]
NCAC Files Brief in U.S. v. Stevens, Urging Supreme Court to Reject “Invitation to Censorship”
In a friend-of-the-court brief filed this week in an important Supreme Court free speech case, NCAC, joined by the College Art Association, warned that a law banning depictions of animal cruelty violates the First Amendment right to free speech, and the exemption it provides for work with “serious value” rings hollow, given the long history of censorship of disturbing or unpopular [...]
Hillary: The Movie: Political commentary or just a really long political ad?
Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the matter of Citizens United v. The Federal Election Commission, Case no. 08-205. This is an interesting case in that the Court, among other things, needs to determine whether Hillary: The Movie, a 90 minute documentary about Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign with a decidedly conservative bias, is considered an “electioneering communication,” [...]
Pleasant Grove v. Summum: Free Speech or Establishment Clause?
According to The Associated Press: The Supreme Court ruled unanimously . . . that a small religious group cannot force a city in Utah to place a granite marker in a local park that already is home to a Ten Commandments display. The case, reported in NCAC’s last issue of Censorship News, involves a Salt Lake City based religious sect [...]
Wyeth v. Levine decision: Victory for the right-to-know
The Supreme Court handed down an opinion today that doesn’t seem to be about suppression of scientific information, but it is. Diana Levine lost her arm when a drug manufactured by Wyeth, was administered to her improperly. Wyeth knew of the risk of this method of administration, but did not disclose it in its warning label. Because the label had [...]
Rogue censorship
Editorial from the Detroit Free Press: Television broadcasts shouldn't be filled with curse words uttered without regard to purpose, time of day or relevance. But it's equally true that the Federal Communications Commission, which has adopted increasingly aggressive but vaguely defined standards for punishing broadcasters who air curse words, shouldn't have such a free hand in suppressing speech. [...] Assuring [...]
The Supreme Court debates fleeting expletives
CommLaw Blog is covering FCC v Fox Television in the Supreme Court. But as Marjorie Heins points out at the Free Expression Policy Project, it looks like the case will turn on what should be censored for "indecency" rather than whether or not the FCC's censorship poses a threat to the First Amendment. She writes: Anyone hoping to hear outrage [...]
In the Supreme Court: Wyeth v. Levine
Dahlia Lithwick, who's covering Wyeth v. Levine in the Supreme Court describes the case like this: "Wyeth is being called the most important business case of the year because, if the court finds that the FDA warning occupies the field of drug warnings, it will effectively immunize drug makers from many state tort suits. If it finds pre-emption here, the most business-friendly Supreme Court in decades can cancel the room with two queen-size beds and order a single king for itself and big pharma".