First Amendment News

A federal appeals court ruled that the act of clicking “like” on Facebook to indicate a preference for a political candidate was protected under the First Amendment. A sheriff department employee lost his job for showing through a “like” click that he preferred the candidacy of his boss’s opponent in the race for sheriff.  (The Los Angeles Times, September 18, 2013, by Salvador Rodriguez) The ruling is regarded as ground-breaking in the Internet age as

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee agreed to a definition of a journalist by a 13-5 vote in approving legislation for a shield law for journalists seeking to keep their sources confidential. “…the version to be debated on the Senate floor will cover journalists who had an ’employment relationship’ for one year within the past 20 years, or three months within the past five years, and someone with a ‘substantial track record’ of freelancing in the

One of the 11 judges sitting on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruled that the Obama administration must consider releasing the court’s classified opinions concerning the National Security Agency’s domestic spying. He said the publication of the opinions would “contribute to an informed debate.” The court had recently released opinions calling the surveillance unconstitutional. (Courthouse News Service, September 16, 2013, by Nick Divito) The judge, F. Dennis Saylor IV of Boston, said a document on

The so-called “black budget” for 2013, federal expenditures on intelligence activities, reveals $52.6 billion in outlays exempt from public scrutiny. (The Washington Post, August 29, 2013, by Barton Gellman and Greg Miller) The budget was five times greater than the Head Start budget, six times greater than the budget for high-speed transit, and 20 times greater than the National Park Service budget. The Defense Department budget was 10 times greater than that for intelligence. (National

California is asking a federal appeals court to allow the state to enforce Proposition 35 that requires sex offenders to reveal their online identities to police. An attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union argued that the proposition violates free speech rights. (San Francisco Chronicle, September 10, 2013, by Bob Egelko) In the hearing before the appeals court, an attorney supporting Prop. 35 said that it did not prevent online speech even anonymous speech or