Professor James Weinstein offers a new iteration of an old argument, which holds that the suppression of pornography raises no free speech issue at all. Weinstein’s reformulation is a valuable contribution, not least because it captures an intuition that is shared by many, including, evidently, the Supreme Court. But the argument fails. It is a mistake to pretend that, when we suppress pornography, we are not infringing on values that lie at the heart of free speech.
"It's important to note that scholars have long observed that political discourse and political events can contribute to the frequency of bias incidents. In fact, this phenomenon has a name today. It's called the Trump Effect."
Voting rights advocates should explore section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act as a vehicle to combat voter intimidation.
A transgender student's expression of her gender identity, including through the use of gender consistent bathrooms, is First Amendment protected speech,
Scholars discuss the most significant immigration-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, their ramifications, and what to expect in 2020.