/explore
|
You are here 
|
www.techdirt.com | ||
| | | | |
amylhowe.com
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that public officials who post about topics relating to their work on their personal social media accounts are acting on behalf of the government, and therefore can be held liable for violating the First Amendment when they block their critics, only when they have the power to speak on... Read More |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu
Within a month, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, L.P.,[1] a case that (i) could radically change the potential for bankruptcy to serve as the preferred mechanism for corporations seeking to resolve mass torts, (ii) could significantly diminish the rights of mass tort vic... |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
www.eff.org
In a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court has finally crafted a test that lower courts can use to determine whether a government official engaged in "state action" such that censoring individuals on the official's social media page-even if also used for personal purposes-would violate the First Amendment. |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
shekel.blogspot.com
It's generally best not to be doing it yourself. NY AG Letitia James (D), who was elected on the promise of "Getting Trump" and who prosecu... |
|
| | | |||
