The Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in Vullo v. NRA underscores the illegality of using regulatory power to coerce financial institutions to de-bank organizations based on their political beliefs, reinforcing free speech protections.
The implications of this case are profound and far-reaching. It sends a clear message to regulatory bodies nationwide: exercise your power cautiously, for the line between guidance and coercion is perilously thin. Vullo’s actions were perceived as an attack on the NRA’s very right to exist and advocate.
The Constitution is not invincible. It is a fragile document that can be destroyed by those seeking temporary gain.
Exploring the rise of antisemitism in the political spectrum, from the far right to the far left. How dangerous rhetoric fuels hatred and violence.
In a landmark ruling, the US Supreme Court redefines the standard for Title VII lawsuits, stating “some harm” is sufficient. Details in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis.
The U.S. District Court Southern District of Indiana found that the “last names only” accommodation presented an undue burden not overcome by Groff when it caused “substantial student harm, and an unreasonable risk of liability” while “sharply contradicting the school’s legally entitled mission to foster a supportive environment for all.”
Explore the paradoxical enforcement of laws in cities like San Francisco, where parking violations are strictly punished while dangerous property damage from outdoor fires goes unaddressed.
Wakeley, a Sydney suburb far from tourist hotspots, became the center of a global debate on freedom of speech after a terrorist attack on Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel. The Australian eSafety Commissioner ordered the removal of graphic footage from social media, sparking controversy with tech billionaire Elon Musk. Should such content be censored globally? The debate rages on.
Thomas More Society attorneys will argue against the Biden Administration and Arconic in a case involving religious discrimination against fired metalworker Daniel Snyder.
