Case Disclosed

In 1931, the landmark decision Near v. Minnesota established that, as a general matter, prior restraints—“government action[s] that prohibit[] speech or other expression before the speech happens”—are unconstitutional under the First Amendment. As with most First Amendment jurisprudence, the decision recognized that there could be exceptional circumstances in which prior restraints may be allowable, notably in the context of national security.

A few months ago, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) sued the government on First and Fifth Amendment grounds for enacting the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act.

In 2017, the Supreme Court recognized in Packingham v. North Carolina that “[w]hile in the past there may have been difficulty in identifying the most important places (in a spatial sense) for the exchange of views, today the answer is clear. It is cyberspace . . . and social media in particular.”

When Kristen Visbel’s “Fearless Girl” was installed at Bowling Green in Manhattan’s Financial District in March of 2017, the statue was hailed by many as an iconic representation of female empowerment. Placed in the path of Wall Street’s famous “Charging Bull,” “Fearless Girl” stares down the massive animal with shoulders back and pigtails flying. Now, more than a year after her installation, “Fearless Girl” continues to draw crowds of tourists, and may soon be moved—along with her charging nemesis—to a location more suited to her flocks of admirers. As with many works of public art, it wasn’t

The prevailing notion that "the Internet is forever" has shaped the way we share our lives online.

On December 14, 2017, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to eliminate the robust net neutrality protections put in place by the Obama Administration in 2015.