This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
While it has received little coverage in the mainstream media, the conservative group Project Veritas won a major victory against the NewYork Times this week in a defamation case with potentially wide reach. Notably, this follows another significant loss by the NewYork Times to Sarah Palin last year. seven times.
I previously wrote about the latest NewYork gun law passed after the Court’s ruling in NewYork State Rifle and Pistol Association v. NewYork Democratic Gov. Once again, it is baffling why NewYork voters continue to enable this type of leadership. Hochul , No.
Heller , the Supreme Court in 2008 ruled the right to bear arms is an individual right. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states. Since then, courts have rejected efforts to limit aspects of gun ownership from barring concealed weapons to restricting ammunition.
There is an interesting First Amendment case brewing in NewYork after an appellate ruled that a mother identified as Christie could lose custody of her daughter unless she removes a rock with a small confederate flag image on it in the driveway.
By a vote of 7-2, the justices ruled that the state courts had applied the wrong test to determine whether Counterman’s statements were “true threats,” which are not protected by the First Amendment. In a solo dissent, Thomas criticized what he characterized as the majority’s “surprising and misplaced reliance on NewYork Times v.
There is an interesting ruling this week out of NewYork where a federal court has ruled in favor of a conservative student group alleging that the State University of NewYork at Binghamton has engaged in a pattern of censorship of conservative speakers and events. I disagree.
As predicted , the Supreme Court handed down a momentous opinion in favor of Second Amendment rights today in NewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f) ” NewYork Gov.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will take up arguably the oldest and most controversial right in our history. NewYork State Rifle Association v. Bruen is the first major gun rights case in over ten years to come before the Supreme Court and it has the makings of a major gun rights victory in the making.
I have previously written about how NewYork has proven time and time again as the gift that keeps on giving for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and gun-rights groups. NewYork Democrats continue to pass laws that are virtually guaranteed to be struck down and further reinforce Second Amendment rights.
Below is my column in the Hill on the makings of a blockbuster case in NewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. Bruen, the first major gun rights case before the Supreme Court in ten years. The court will soon take up NewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f)
Supreme Courtruled that the National Rifle Association (NRA) may continue its First Amendment lawsuit against the former head of NewYork’s Department of Financial Services. The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Second Circuit to evaluate the NRA’s claims in accordance with its opinion.
We have been discussing ( here and here and here ) the Supreme Court challenge in NewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. Bruen , the first Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court in over ten years. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states.
As noted by scholars such as Stephen Halbrook , it is also the first appellate court to rely on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rahimi , which gun rights advocates argued might be a break in the dam of Second Amendment protections. That dubious claim is even less compelling after reading this opinion.
The law further states “The duty to notify a person or agency under this section is met if a person notifies or attempts to provide such notice by telephone or any other means as soon as reasonably possible.”. I am unaware of such a law in Pennsylvania, but these laws are rarely enforced. The charge was later dismissed.
The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in NewYork Times v. The Supreme Courtruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. In Neiman-Marcus v. Confidential.”
There is an interesting defamation case out of NewYork in which the Second Circuit upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit by Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam (NOI) against the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and individual defendants Jonathan Greenblatt, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and Rabbi Abraham Cooper.
Such a criminal law would be ripe for abuse and would create a chilling effect that would be positively glacial. This country has a long history of election fraud from Tammany Hall in NewYork to the Daley machine in Chicago. The Inslee law would create a new and vague category for violent speech. In Brandenburg v.
While the lower courtsruled for Harvard, the trial judge did note that there may have been bias in favor of minority admissions and encouraged Harvard to deal with such “implicit bias” while monitoring “any significant race-related statistical disparities in the rating process.” On tests, Asian kids shows a 74.4
The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision over 50 years ago in NewYork Times v. The NewYork Times had run an advertisement referring to abuses of civil rights marchers and the arrest of Martin Luther King Jr. seven times.
Since the 1970s, the Supreme Court has ruled that race could not be a determinative or major factor in admissions. Bakke, the Courtruled against affirmative action. The latest was State University of NewYork (SUNY) system Chancellor John B. In Regents of the University of California v.
For example, NewYork and numerous other cities have declared themselves to be “sanctuaries” for undocumented immigrants yet, in recent months, have protested increasing transfers of such immigrants to their jurisdiction. In City of Richmond v.
Canon law imposes a sacramental seal over the confessional that is treated as inviolable. In 1813 in NewYork, the clergy-penitent privilege faced an early challenge in People v. In 1993, the Courtruled in Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. Accordingly, under Canon 983.1, In that case, Fr.
As Eugene Volokh correctly pointed out , the California Labor Code protects “political activities” employees and the California Supreme Courtruled in Gay Law Students Ass’n v. 1979) that “political activities” includes not just electioneering but also “espousal of … a cause.”. Veteran reporter Donald McNeil Jr.,
Free speech has always held a precarious position in Australia which does not have an equivalent to the First Amendment in guaranteeing free speech as a constitutional right. Despite this history, a new decision out of the High Court is still shocking in its implications for further attacks on free speech.
NewYork has long been the source of major litigation over gun control. That includes the possible loss before the Supreme Court in a pending major gun rights case. Now, NewYork has moved to ban anyone under age 21 from buying or possessing a semi-automatic rifle in response to the recent shootings at a supermarket in Buffalo.
NewYork Gov. The first “technical change” would be to rescind the law. Tam the Courtruled against the government’s use of the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act. C-Span Screenshot. As a long-standing free speech advocate, you must often defend speech that you find offensive. In Matal v.
District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle has ruled that the federal law prohibiting people from possessing firearms inside post offices is unconstitutional. The ruling is based on 2022 Supreme CourtrulingNewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association v. The case concerned Emmanuel Ayala, U.S.
There is a move in many states to refuse to allow such exemptions, but courts have pushed back. In NewYork, the state is appealing a preliminary injunction against its refusal to allow religious exemptions to its vaccine mandate. They also can refile if the lower court has not reached a decision by Oct.
The decision comes after two other district courtsruled in favor of the law — sending this issue to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and potentially the Supreme Court. Moderate efforts at gun control are often ramped up in the legislative process to become more and more sweeping.
NewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Another potentially historic case is coming out of NewYork: NewYork State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Ten years ago, the Supreme Court handed down the landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. Oral argument is Dec. Just last week, D.C.
Cities, too, are enforcing misgendering rules; for example, the NewYork City Human Rights Law allows for fines if employers, landlords or professionals fail to use a preferred name, pronoun or title. Yet some people have religious beliefs against following the new order and using such pronouns.
The founder of the NewYork Society for the Suppression of Vice fought to criminalize the mailing of any obscene work, a broadly define category that included protected political speech. In a 2002 ruling, the U.S. It appears that Anthony Comstock is having something of a revival in Oklahoma. In Ashcroft v.
In the past, politicians in cities like NewYork, Chicago and Washington, D.C., Moreover, the earlier ban was imposed in 1994 — before the Supreme Courtruled in District of Columbia v. have proven to be the gun lobby’s greatest asset. Heller that the right to bear arms is an individual right.
Below is my column in the NewYork Post on the ruling against Nina Jankowicz in her defamation case. It turns out the calling opposing views defamation is no better than calling them disinformation.
In court papers, she was identified only as “L.C.”. Four years later, her case reached the Supreme Court. In a 6-3 opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the courtruled in Olmstead v. Glucksberg , a case in which he helped persuade the court to unanimously uphold Washington’s ban on physician-assisted suicide.
After Dobbs was accepted, advocates sought to enjoin a Texas law that banned abortion after just six weeks. The courtruled 5-4 to allow the Texas law to be enforced. The court — as expected — allowed the appeal to go forward for some of the litigants in the lower court but again refused to enjoin the law.
Civil and statutory claims can be curtailed by constitutional limitations. Supreme Courtruled against a provision of federal law that banned computer simulations and virtual pornography under the first amendment. In NewYork Times v. This is such a case in my view. In 2002, the U.S. In Ashcroft v.
In the past, politicians in cities like NewYork, Chicago and Washington, D.C., Moreover, the earlier ban was imposed in 1994 — before the Supreme Courtruled in District of Columbia v. have proven to be the gun lobby’s greatest asset. Heller that the right to bear arms is an individual right.
.” Ironically, it was the only part of the president’s remarks that is consistent with what the court actually said in its decision in Dobbs v. Wade, the courtruled that millions of citizens, not nine justices, must now decide the question of abortion. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In overturning Roe v.
I recently wrote a column on the hypocrisy of Democratic activists and members denouncing attacks on democracy as they engage in raw gerrymandering in states like NewYork. It is important to note that Republicans have also had courtsrule against them in states like North Carolina and Pennsylvania).
One of the leading cases occurred in 1952 in a NewYork lawsuit. Previously, MSNBC legal analyst and Michigan Law Professor Barbara McQuade told MSNBC viewers that Trump could be charged with manslaughter for his role in the January 6 Capitol riot. The Court in cases like NewYork Times v. Confidential.”
Below is my column in the NewYork Post on the Supreme Court’s historic presidential immunity decision. Yet, the reaction to the Court’s decision has been baffling from academics who did not raise a whimper of opposition when President Barack Obama killed an American citizen without a trial or a charge.
The column predicts that critics will likely respond to the expected new precedent by attacking the integrity rather than the interpretations of the justices. The NewYork Times did not wait for any new decisions and attacked the integrity of the conservative justices as the “ judicial arm of the Republican Party.”
The Project recently won a significant victory in defeating such a motion from the NewYork Times. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in NewYork Times v. Project Veritas has been accused of misleading edits or accounts.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content