Justice Neil Gorsuch: religious freedom’s new champion
When his fellow justices defend religious liberty only tepidly, Gorsuch’s concurring opinions stake out stronger positions. When his colleagues do not defend religious liberty at all, he dissents.
Twitter v. Trump, Part 3: Trump’s best ‘free speech’ claim against Twitter
If the plaintiffs actually do uncover systematic efforts by the Biden administration and other Democratic officeholders to suppress freedom of speech and freedom of the press, this will be the most egregious abuse-of-power scandal in recent times.
Trump v. Twitter, Part 2: Can a private company violate the First Amendment?
So, the theory goes, if Congress invited Twitter to exercise political censorship, then Congress violated the First Amendment. But this theory also has weaknesses . . . .
New from the Supreme Court: A smashing victory for religious liberty
This case reflected an irony common these days: The majority the media calls “conservative” applying liberal precedent while the three most liberal justices argued against it!
One reason public discourse is so vile: We’ve forgotten the 1st Amendment’s meaning
Judges have no special expertise in identifying or balancing social benefits and social losses. . . Their rules turned out to be flawed. One of their flaws is that they pushed down the standards for public discourse.
A new Supreme Court case on establishment of religion
By the time ratification was complete, the Constitution’s implications for religion were understood: Religious faith was valuable for good government. But government was to treat individual religions equally, as long as they conducted themselves in an orderly manner.
Two liberal Supreme Court justices slap down the Left’s historical desecration
Two of the Supreme Court’s most liberal members effectively told us they want no part of this campaign of historical destruction.
Jon Caldara Interviews Rob Natelson on Why Colorado’s “Anti-Sectarian” Rule Violates the U.S. Constitution
The Colorado Constitution’s ban on aid to “sectarian” institutions flatly violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
New Research Finds Most State Constitutional “Blaine Amendments” Facially Unconstitutional
Rob’s new research demonstrates that bans on “sectarian” aid were . . . designed to require state officials to discriminate in favor of mainstream Protestantism and against any faiths they deemed “bigoted” or “extreme.”
Supreme Court’s Ruling Against the PC Police
The Supreme Court’s decision this week in Matal v. Tam sent a clear warning to government officials who seek to curtail speech they deem offensive: We won’t let you do it! The warning was particularly pointed for the PC Police at state universities who try to close down viewpoints they find “offensive.” A federal law ordered the […]
Free speech, diversity of through vital to the college experience
Recent events on college campuses nationwide make it clear student’s rights to free speech are in jeopardy. Campus leaders have allowed and promoted a type of Orwellian suppression of free expression that punishes deviation from specific lines of thought. Though state legislatures have made efforts to address these problems, far more needs to be done to treat the underlying disease rather than the symptoms.
First Amendment Protection is for More Than Political Speech
This article was first published in CNS News. The modern U.S. Supreme Court grants more First Amendment protection to political discourse than to other forms of expression, such as commercial advertising. The court holds that political discourse enjoys a “preferred position.” The preferred position doctrine is taught in the nation’s law schools, so many lawyers […]
