When wielded by influential figures, harmful rhetoric can set the stage for violence, even if the original intention was merely to win an argument or score political points.
The Perilous Power of Political Rhetoric Read More »
If the government gains more leverage over platform speech, it might restrict religious expression deemed harmful, even if the platforms themselves would allow it.
No Clear Verdict: Supreme Court Sidesteps Social Media Censorship Battle Read More »
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.
Guns, Banks, and the Beast: Unpacking the Supreme Court’s Latest Ruling Read More »
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.
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.
Australia v. Elon Musk: Free Speech and an Abundance of Arrogance Read More »
The Supreme Court ruled that Colorado can’t force a website designer to create designs that go against their beliefs, protecting free speech rights. This decision has implications for artists and creative producers who have reasons to decline certain projects.
Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, is again in the news after a Colorado court ruled he had illegally discriminated by refusing to make a cake to celebrate a gender transition. The court found that Phillips’ refusal to make the cake violated a customer’s right to be free from discrimination. ADF attorneys are appealing the decision, arguing that no one should be forced to express a message against their core beliefs.
Colorado Court: Baker Must Provide “Non-Expressive” Cake to Transgender Customer Read More »
The rise of political correctness signals a return to the traditioning and character-forming model of education but with a different tradition to pass on, a different moral vision to inculcate, and a different vision of how character should be formed.
Academic Freedom in Context Read More »
During the 2022-23 term, the Supreme Court will consider a case that raises this issue: “Whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment.”
This morning the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Shurtleff v. Boston (Dec’d 5/2/2022) that the city of Boston violated the free speech rights of a Christian group when it refused to allow them to participate in a city flag raising program.
