On January 8th, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case involving a high school student who was suspended from her cheerleading team for a Snapchat selfie she made after school hours. The lower courts are currently split as to whether a school can discipline off-campus speech that is substantially disruptive and closesly linked to school.
“Not all documentation is reasonable,” Nicolas Riley, one of the plaintiff's attorneys, said, noting that most people could see why an 18-person camera crew might be disruptive. “The problem here was that the court had made it impossible to get down what happened during bail hearings.”
A Philadelphia-based nonprofit and an independent journalist have sued officials in Pennsylvania’s First Judicial District for banning audio recording in […]
The Chamber of Commerce of Greater Philadelphia brought a lawsuit against Philadephia for an ordinance that banned employers from inquiring about a job-seeker’s salary history, stating that it was 'bad for business.' The ordinance has two parts - "it prohibits an employer from inquiring about a prospective employee’s wage history (“the Inquiry Provision”); and second, it makes it illegal for an employer to rely on wage history “at any stage in the employment process” to determine a salary for an employee (“the Reliance Provision”)." Philadelphia approved the ordinance in January to take effect this May. However, U.S. District Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ruled that the "inquiry provision" specifically violated the First Amendment's free speech clause. “Although the ordinance represents a significant positive attempt to address the wage gap, the First Amendment compels me to enjoin implementation of the inquiry provision." Will this chill efforts in other states and cities that have been passing similar ordinances?