Free Speech
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues
The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida鈥檚 order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students鈥� constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The 吃瓜直播 and its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn 吃瓜直播 Free Speech
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Free Speech
Molina v. Book
Whether police officers violated clearly established First Amendment rights when they tear-gassed plaintiffs for serving as legal observers in a public protest.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2023
Free Speech
O鈥機onnor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The 吃瓜直播, the 吃瓜直播 of Northern California, and the 吃瓜直播 of Southern California filed amicus briefs in support of everyday people fighting for government transparency and accountability in two cases set for review by the U.S. Supreme Court this Term: O鈥機onnor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2021
Free Speech
Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.
On September 25, 2017, the 吃瓜直播-PA filed suit on behalf of B.L., a high school sophomore who has been cheerleading since she was in fifth grade and was expelled from the team as punishment for out-of-school speech.
All Cases
149 Free Speech Cases
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2022
Free Speech
Shurtleff v. City of Boston
For more than a decade, Boston has allowed nearly 300 private groups to temporarily fly their flags outside of City Hall. Did the city violate the First Amendment when it denied Camp Constitution鈥檚 request to fly its flag for a single hour because the flag has a religious symbol?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2022
Free Speech
Shurtleff v. City of Boston
For more than a decade, Boston has allowed nearly 300 private groups to temporarily fly their flags outside of City Hall. Did the city violate the First Amendment when it denied Camp Constitution鈥檚 request to fly its flag for a single hour because the flag has a religious symbol?
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2022
Free Speech
+2 Issues
Carmack v. Janny et al
The 吃瓜直播, along with Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and Colorado law firm DLA Piper, represent Mark Janny, an atheist whose religious-freedom rights were violated by his parole officer when Janny was sent to jail after refusing to take part in worship and religious activities.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2022
Free Speech
+2 Issues
Carmack v. Janny et al
The 吃瓜直播, along with Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and Colorado law firm DLA Piper, represent Mark Janny, an atheist whose religious-freedom rights were violated by his parole officer when Janny was sent to jail after refusing to take part in worship and religious activities.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California
Whether California鈥檚 blanket demand for tax documents identifying the major donors to nonprofit organizations infringes the First Amendment right to associational privacy, in light of the state鈥檚 demonstrated inability to maintain the confidentiality of that information?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California
Whether California鈥檚 blanket demand for tax documents identifying the major donors to nonprofit organizations infringes the First Amendment right to associational privacy, in light of the state鈥檚 demonstrated inability to maintain the confidentiality of that information?
Court Case
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
吃瓜直播 v. CBP - FOIA Case for Records Relating to Government鈥檚 Aerial Surveillance of Protesters
In December 2021, the 吃瓜直播 and NYCLU filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information from nine federal agencies鈥攖he United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Protective Service (FPS), Marshals Service (USMS), and Secret Service (USSS)鈥攁bout nationwide aerial surveillance and flight monitoring of protests in 2020 following the death of George Floyd.
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
吃瓜直播 v. CBP - FOIA Case for Records Relating to Government鈥檚 Aerial Surveillance of Protesters
In December 2021, the 吃瓜直播 and NYCLU filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information from nine federal agencies鈥攖he United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Protective Service (FPS), Marshals Service (USMS), and Secret Service (USSS)鈥攁bout nationwide aerial surveillance and flight monitoring of protests in 2020 following the death of George Floyd.
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Free Speech
National Security
吃瓜直播 v. United States
The 吃瓜直播 has filed three motions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) asking it to release secret opinions authorizing the surveillance of Americans. The public has a right to see the legal decisions addressing novel surveillance programs that affect our privacy and free speech rights 鈥� but many of the FISC鈥檚 opinions remained closely guarded secrets.
After the FISC and its appeals court rejected the 吃瓜直播鈥檚 public access arguments in a series of rulings, the 吃瓜直播 asked the Supreme Court to review those rulings and to recognize that the public has a First Amendment right of access to the FISC鈥檚 opinions.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
Free Speech
National Security
吃瓜直播 v. United States
The 吃瓜直播 has filed three motions in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) asking it to release secret opinions authorizing the surveillance of Americans. The public has a right to see the legal decisions addressing novel surveillance programs that affect our privacy and free speech rights 鈥� but many of the FISC鈥檚 opinions remained closely guarded secrets.
After the FISC and its appeals court rejected the 吃瓜直播鈥檚 public access arguments in a series of rulings, the 吃瓜直播 asked the Supreme Court to review those rulings and to recognize that the public has a First Amendment right of access to the FISC鈥檚 opinions.