First Amendment News

Attorney K-Sue Park, The New York Times, August 17, 2017, argues that the American Civil Liberties Union should reconsider its stance on protecting hate speech since it helps hate groups to project their bigotry and makes no inroads into securing a freedom and security for people of color. ACLU member Bruce Hartford, Huffington Post, August 19, 2017, writes that the white-supremacists in Charlottesville reminded him of Nazis marching in Germany to intimidate and silence Jews,

President Donald Trump renewed his venomous attack on the press at his Tuesday, August 22 rally in Phoenix, calling the press “sick people” who “don’t like our country” and are “trying to takeaway our history and our heritage.” There are concerns that in the heated atmosphere after the Charlottesville debacle that the attack will increasingly put journalists in the cross-hairs. We are already seeing Cambodia using Trump’s anti-press remarks as justification for threats to shout

An editorial in The New York Times, August 18, 2017, after the Charlottesville violence, questions the viability of open carry at political demonstrations. Armed self-appointed militias in military garb are showing up ostensibly to enforce law and order but act as a major force of intimidation of peaceful protestors. “These strutting vigilantes have become such a threatening presence that government should rein them in to allow for a truly free exchange of ideas. State and

The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected a First Amendment lawsuit against a San Francisco ordinance banning new commercial billboards except for ones attached to buildings that pertain to the businesses inside. The ordinance exempts noncommercial messages. The judges found that billboards can pose significant public safety hazards and contribute to “blight and visual clutter.” (Metropolitan News-Enterprise, August 17, 2017, by a Met News Staff Writer) Judge Susan Graber writing for a unanimous panel

A federal judge denied a request of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) for President Donald Trump’s income tax records. The judge acknowledged the public interest in seeing the records but found no legal justification for forcing Trump to provide them. “…there are two established routes that could offer relief: President Trump may himself agree to this release of information, or, as EPIC suggests, Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation can authorize disclosure in the appropriate