News & Opinion

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal by a church that claims a Gilbert, Arizona  sign ordinance violated its free speech rights. The church claimed a local law discriminated on the basis of content by restricting the size of its ads and relegating them to less prominent sites. (MSN News, July 1, 2014, by Reuters reporter Lawrence Hurley) Governments are rarely allowed to restrict speech on the basis of content but there are some

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that home health-care employees did not have to pay dues to a union that sought higher wages and benefits for its members. In writing for the majority in the 5-4 ruling, Justice Samuel Alito held that mandatory union dues under Illinois law were a violation of free speech, “…except perhaps in the rarest of circumstances, no person in this country may be compelled to subsidize speech by a third party

A Star Tribune editorial argued that the U.S. Supreme Court struck the right balance in protecting citizens at abortion clinics while allowing free speech for those seeking to discourage abortions. The Court ruled that a 35-foot zone was too limiting to protesters but ruled on narrow grounds allowing states to enact buffer zone laws that still allow free speech but also protect citizens from harassment. (Minneapolis Star Tribune, June 29, 2014, by the Editorial Board)

The U.S. Supreme Court 9-0 resurrected the challenge to a Massachusetts buffer-zone law that allows a 35-foot buffer zone between protestors and abortion clinics.  “Reversing that decision Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the statute violates the First Amendment because the statute is not sufficiently tailored to limit the burden on the protesters’ speech,” wrote Barbara Leonard. In trying to make safe passage for those seeking abortions, the law went too far in limiting

Journalists got some good news this week when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that law enforcers need warrants to search the cell phones of those under arrest. While the case was not focused on journalists, they stand to gain from a prohibition on police searches of their cell phones. (Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, June 25, 2014, by Bradley Chance) Noting that cell phones are the new reporters notebooks, Josh Stearns for