For those who cannot imagine a time less favorable to a free press than the present moment, Ronald K.L. Collins' essay serves as a useful reminder that some of the biggest threats to the First Amendment took place in the first decade following ratification.
SmileDirectClub, a company that sells teeth straightening kits directly to consumers, has sued NBC News and reporter Vicky Nguyen over a story that suggested the product may cause oral health problems.
“No politician likes being the subject of critical coverage, but that comes with elected office, and I would be abdicating my role as a journalist if I failed to hold local government, including the City of Memphis, accountable,” Thomas said in a press statement.
After analyzing the sixteen allegedly defamatory statements, U.S. District Court Judge C.J. Williams found that the plaintiffs had neither identified what about them was false nor provided any facts that would have shown them to be false.
Represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, students claim their school's policies limit spontaneous expression, and leave them vulnerable to viewpoint discrimination.
On May 8th, the Texas Supreme Court ruled in a 5-3 decision that a defamation suit brought by a former NFL player against TMZ can move forward. Former Dallas Cowboys linebacker Robert Jones sued TMZ and its parent company, Warner Bros. Entertainment, in Travis County District Court in 2015, one year after TMZ published a story alleging that Jones tried to hire Watson to kill his sports agent.
“By banning protests generally, and denying Givens’ permit specifically, Defendants have deprived Givens of the opportunity for airing his grievances against the government, including the State’s failure to conduct timely background checks for those wishing to purchase a gun and restrictions on speech activities,” the complaint argues.
The U.S. Supreme Court considers a challenge to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a law passed in 1991 that prohibits the use of automated calls to cell phones. The plaintiffs, a group of political consultants, argue that the law and its exceptions discriminate based on the content of the caller's message.