While leading I & A, Brian Murphy compiled intelligence reports on two journalists–a New York Times reporter and Lawfare’s editor-in-chief– who had published leaked department documents. Murphy also compiled reports analyzing protesters' electronic messages that discussed tactics such as which routes to follow and how to avoid the police.
The case was brought by an association of political consultants who argued that a 2015 exception for calls to collect government debt violated the First Amendment. While the majority of justices agreed with the consultants that the 2015 exception was unconstitutional (6-3), an even greater majority disagreed with their argument for striking down the law in its entirety (7-2).
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.
The San Francisco police raided Bryan Carmody's home and office in May 2019 to find information on an anonymous source. Unsealed documents later revealed that the police did not inform the judges who had approved of the search warrants that Carmody had a valid press pass.
Regulating robocalls based on the content of their messaging presents a more severe threat to First Amendment freedoms than regulating their time, place, and manner," the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in a case involving Montana's robocall laws.
After months reporting on a local politician’s contract work in Malheur County, journalists at a small newspaper in eastern Oregon […]
The New Jersey Attorney General and three state election enforcement officials are being sued by Americans for Prosperity (AFP), over […]
Breaking News Update South Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Donald Beatty vacated the order that would have prohibited lawyers from […]