Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Cases pertaining to whether or not extending protections to speech constitutes government endorsement of speech. Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009) Walker v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans (2015) Matal v. Tam (2017) Iancu v. Brunetti (2019) Shurtleff v. City of Boston, No. 20-1800, 596 U.S. ___ (2022)
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
This case is considered a "classic" free speech case in constitutional law classes. [2] Related court decisions are captioned Skokie v. NSPA, Collin v. Smith, [3] and Smith v. Collin. [4] The Supreme Court ruled 5–4, per curiam.
303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, 600 U.S. 570 (2023), is a United States Supreme Court decision that dealt with the intersection of anti-discrimination law in public accommodations with the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday is hearing arguments on whether laws proposed by Texas and Florida to ban social media companies from removing content are constitutional. Here's everything you ...
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday in a decision on free speech in the digital age set a new standard for determining if public officials acted in a governmental capacity when ...
Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. 507 (2022), is a landmark decision [1] by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held, 6–3, that the government, while following the Establishment Clause, may not suppress an individual from engaging in personal religious observance, as doing so would violate the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.