The newspaper sued the university after the student government passed a bill excluding media student groups from accessing activity funds. The legislation was passed just days after the paper published a controversial article satirizing safe spaces.
In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit wrote that the lower court’s restraining order was too broad because it failed to specify who qualified as a journalist or legal observer. In previous hearings, the federal government had argued that differentiating between journalists and protesters was especially difficult given that some protesters wear press insignia to avoid the police’s crowd control tactics.
The judge extended a preliminary injunction prohibiting federal agents from "arresting, threatening to arrest, or using physical force" against journalists or legal observers. An attorney working with the ACLU on the case called the court's decision "a crucial victory for civil liberties and freedom of the press."
Protesters in Tennessee charged with rioting, assaulting a police officer, or vandalizing state property will now face greater fines and longer prison sentences, following a new bill signed into law on August 18th by Governor Bill Lee.
The order prohibits American companies from doing business with TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, a move experts say would eventually prevent Americans from using the app. Both the American Civil Liberties Union and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University warned the White House’s efforts to cut ties with Chinese social media companies violate the First Amendment rights of U.S. users.
The lawsuit claims that the filming of demonstrators violates a state law that prohibits collecting information about the political, religious, or social views of an individual or group who are not suspected of criminal activity. The practice could also discourage protesters from attending demonstrations to avoid state surveillance.
The district judge rejected the notion that journalists had no legal right to remain in an area where officers had issued an order to disperse. "Without journalists and legal observers, there is only the government’s side of the story to explain why a ‘riot’ was declared and the public streets were ‘closed’ and whether law enforcement acted properly in effectuating that order,” the judge wrote.
A federal judge orders Cohen to be released after finding that the purpose of his re-imprisonment was in retaliation for his plans to criticize Trump. Prior to being put back in prison, Cohen was pressured into signing an agreement that would have relinquished his First Amendment rights.