Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

.Institute for Justice's First Amendment retaliation case, Gonzalez v. Trevino, is now fully briefed and ready for argument before #SCOTUS on 3/20/24. The case will decide whether (or not) petty tyrants across the U.S. can use pretextual arrests to punish their critics.
supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?fi…

55 years ago today, our clients Mary Beth and John made history in Tinker v. Des Moines. They were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.

This case made it clear: The First Amendment protects public school students. But the fight isn't over.

You might not like The Satanic Temple.

You might not think it counts as a religion.

But if people's rights depended on others' support for their beliefs, none of our rights would be safe.

Iowa's proposed ban targeting satanic displays on state property is unconstitutional.

Under the #1stAmendment , Americans are supposed to have the right to criticize the government without fear of retaliation, yet last week a Kentucky appeals court case showed the extraordinary lengths local governments will go to silence critics.
courier-journal.com/story/opinion/…

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

JUST FILED: FIRE sides with NRA, ACLU in First Amendment Supreme Court case

In a new friend-of-the-court filing, FIRE asks the Supreme Court to rule that government officials cannot censor protected speech by punishing speakers’ associates.

The First Amendment does not let

I protect your right not to be compelled to produce sexual-content ratings for books.

Bad Legal Takes Is it just me or is a response to The First Amendment always in the annual top four?

Constitutional to boot

Happy New Year! These were the four most popular Bad Legal Takes of 2023. Now you get to pick your favorite:

The beauty of the first amendment is that you are free to say stupid things and we’re all free to say what you said was stupid.