Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It was the first U.S. Supreme Court ruling to address free speech rights with respect to homosexuality. Manual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day, 370 U.S. 348 (1962) Images of naked men are not, per se, obscene, extending Olesen in a way that spurred an increase in same-sex erotica that helped spur the rise of the LGBTQ rights movement later in the decade.
Cases that consider the First Amendment implications of payments mandated by the state going to use in part for speech by third parties Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) Communications Workers of America v. Beck (1978) Chicago Local Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986) Keller v. State Bar of California (1990) Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass'n ...
Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton: 23-1122: Whether the court of appeals erred as a matter of law in applying rational-basis review to a law burdening adults’ access to protected speech, instead of strict scrutiny as this Court and other circuits have consistently done. July 2, 2024: January 15, 2025 Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization ...
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 ...
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".
The Supreme Court may soon consider two cases challenging limits on ... areas outside a local abortion clinic as an “obstacle course” that “plainly ‘abridges’ the right to free speech ...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide whether a New York state official stifled the ability of the National Rifle Association to exercise free speech rights ...
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. Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety: 20-603: 2022-6-29