Patel vows to end the FBI’s role in online censorship but signals openness to Section 230 reforms that could impact encryption.
The $25 million deal signals a strategic shift for Meta as it navigates its relationship with Trump and his political influence.
Tennessee’s age verification law moves forward despite concerns over privacy violations and questionable effectiveness in protecting minors.
It’s a common misconception that you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.
NewsGuard claims its ratings promote transparency, but critics question their role in broader censorship frameworks.
Compelled speech.
Senator Paul’s stance ignites debate over CISA’s role.
California’s deepfake law pits free speech against election integrity in a First Amendment showdown.
The reprieve allows The Babylon Bee and other satirists to continue unfettered political humor.
Despite heated public debate, ACS deleted hundreds of Facebook comments—prompting free speech advocates to step in.
The Biden administration steps into a pivotal First Amendment battle, pushing for age verification laws.
California’s new laws could set a dangerous precedent for regulating satire and political speech.
Ignoring the First Amendment.
Civil liberties group slams Pennsylvania’s executive order as unconstitutional.
Following evidence of the Biden-Harris administration pressuring social media platforms to censor speech.
Free speech and privacy concerns.
Critics argue the ban sidesteps addressing the real causes of San Francisco’s housing crisis, while raising potential First Amendment issues by restricting access to information.
Media companies sue Louisiana, arguing new law cripples police accountability and infringes on First Amendment rights.
Bailey warns of more government coerced censorship.
That’s the point.
Brill’s proposals spark controversy over potential suppression of online anonymity and free speech.
Legal challenge argues First Amendment infringement and raises privacy concerns over mandatory personal data disclosure.
But the court made its First Amendment stance very clear.
Jim Jordan emphasizes the urgent need to protect free speech from government interference.
Patel vows to end the FBI’s role in online censorship but signals openness to Section 230 reforms that could impact encryption.
The $25 million deal signals a strategic shift for Meta as it navigates its relationship with Trump and his political influence.
Tennessee’s age verification law moves forward despite concerns over privacy violations and questionable effectiveness in protecting minors.
It’s a common misconception that you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.
NewsGuard claims its ratings promote transparency, but critics question their role in broader censorship frameworks.
Compelled speech.
Senator Paul’s stance ignites debate over CISA’s role.
California’s deepfake law pits free speech against election integrity in a First Amendment showdown.
The reprieve allows The Babylon Bee and other satirists to continue unfettered political humor.
Despite heated public debate, ACS deleted hundreds of Facebook comments—prompting free speech advocates to step in.
The Biden administration steps into a pivotal First Amendment battle, pushing for age verification laws.
California’s new laws could set a dangerous precedent for regulating satire and political speech.
Ignoring the First Amendment.
Civil liberties group slams Pennsylvania’s executive order as unconstitutional.
Following evidence of the Biden-Harris administration pressuring social media platforms to censor speech.
Free speech and privacy concerns.
Critics argue the ban sidesteps addressing the real causes of San Francisco’s housing crisis, while raising potential First Amendment issues by restricting access to information.
Media companies sue Louisiana, arguing new law cripples police accountability and infringes on First Amendment rights.
Bailey warns of more government coerced censorship.
That’s the point.
Brill’s proposals spark controversy over potential suppression of online anonymity and free speech.
Legal challenge argues First Amendment infringement and raises privacy concerns over mandatory personal data disclosure.
But the court made its First Amendment stance very clear.
Jim Jordan emphasizes the urgent need to protect free speech from government interference.
