Reprinted with Permission from Ballard Spahr An article in The New York Times about controversy surrounding an Ohio State University cancer researcher was […]
Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. defended his right to censor the university’s student newspaper, arguing that the practice does […]
The Newseum Institute’s First Amendment expert, Gene Policinski, originally published this commentary on June 13, 2019, on the Newseum blog, […]
President Donald Trump took to Twitter and urged his supporters to boycott CNN’s parent company, AT&T. “I believe that if people stoped (sic) using or subscribing to @ATT, they would be forced to make big changes at @CNN, which is dying in the ratings anyway. It is so unfair with such bad, Fake News! Why wouldn’t they act. When the World watches @CNN, it gets a false picture of USA. Sad!," he tweeted.
Updated 3/25/2020: District court rejected Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss PEN America’s lawsuit, says the case can proceed. PEN America […]
According to a newly released American Bar Association civics literacy survey, the American public displays strong support for the First Amendment, but knowledge of the specifics of its protections are lacking.
An NBC affiliate in San Diego and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a suit under the Freedom of Information Act in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against four federal agencies. The complaint filed against the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Citizenship and Immigration Services seeks to obtain records requested in a March, 2019 FOIA concerning an alleged secret database the federal government had created on journalists covering immigration issues at the US and Mexico border.
An Australian gag order that is preventing the media from reporting on one of the country's biggest stories has made its way to the US, preventing outlets with bureaus Down Under from covering the verdict of a Cardinal convicted of five counts of sexual abuse. In a digital age, are orders like this one still relevant and viable?