donal brown

With oral arguments, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed to lean toward ruling that a web designer in Colorado could refuse to serve same-sex couples given her Christian ideals. Their ruling could establish a First Amendment right to put religious beliefs above a state’s interest in restricting discrimination based on sexual orientation. (The New York Times, December 6, 2022, by Adam Liptak) Berkeley law dean Erwin Chemerinsky, Los Angeles Times, December 4, 2022, warns that a

Law professors Michele Goodwin and Mary Ziegler, The New York Times, December 3, 2022, document the way anti-abortion advocates are trampling free speech rights to advance their cause. State legislature are passing laws making it a crime to provide information about abortions or to promote them. There is no love for free speech in laws that would outlaw speech that “encourages or facilitates efforts to obtain an illegal abortion.” For related FAC coverage, click here,

The Internet Archive launched Democracy’s Library, a searchable online collection of the world’s government publications. Recently documents were often for sale through commercial databases or in collections aging and deteriorating with little or no standards for accessibility. The new library is expected to be a boon for reporters trying to hold politicians accountable and for reporters working on international affairs. (Columbia Journalism Review, December 5, 2022, by Maria Bustillos) For related FAC coverage, click here,

A Contra Costa County, California judge erred in granting a motion by a teacher accused of sexual abuse to keep journalists from contacting people submitting letters of support. Prior restraint has long been held as a violation of freedom of the press even though judges often enact “confidentiality orders” that media outlets often do not have the resources to fight. (Freedom of the Press Foundation, November 30, 2022, by Seth Stern) For related FAC coverage,

Three plaintiffs filed suit against New York Attorney General Letitia James contesting a hate speech law that outlaws speech perceived to “’vilify, humiliate, or incite violence against a group or class of persons’ based on race, color, religion, or other protected categories.” The law was enacted to prevent racists from posting their rants leading to violent acts. The plaintiffs claim the law singles out “disfavored but protected speech” and holds social media accountable for hateful