The father of a high school basketball player from Troy, N.Y., banned from school athletic events, had his First Amendment claim continue as a federal appeals court panel ruled that school officials were not entitled to qualified immunity.
Does a federal law that generally bans automated debt-collection calls to cell phones — unless the call is made to collect a debt owed to or guaranteed by the United States — violate the First Amendment?
“First, three of the five justices of the Supreme Court in office at the same time, shall be of one major political party, and two of said justices shall be of the other major political party.” So reads a part of Article IV, Section 3 of the Delaware Constitution.
New York laws banning internet and social media access for all sex offenders — even those who never used the internet or social media to commit a sex offense — violates the First Amendment, says a new lawsuit filed by five individuals in Jones v. Stanford.
Can the government constitutionally criminalize the advocacy of violating immigration? That question forms the centerpiece of an interesting case, U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith, recently argued before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Public librarians should have the ability and editorial discretion to select books for libraries without the censorial hand of members of the community looking over their shoulders and making decisions about content.
A man arrested for filming police at a Mardi Gras parade contends that the officers violated his First Amendment free-speech rights and his Fourth Amendment right to be free from a false arrest and excessive force.
A man convicted of aggravated possession of drugs did not have a religiously-based defense to his possession of psychedelic mushrooms, an Ohio appeals court has ruled. The man had argued that he used the mushrooms for religious experiences and, as such, he should be immune from the drug laws.