Archive | Freedom of Speech

Indiana Attorney General’s Office Agrees: Indiana Supreme Court Should Review the Brewington Case

Readers might recall the Brewington case, in which the Indiana Court of Appeals basically held that harshly criticizing people for their past conduct could constitute the crime of “intimidation.” Daniel Brewington was involved in a contentious child custody dispute; Judge James D. Humphrey ruled against him in this dispute, giving sole custody to Brewington’s wife, […]

Continue Reading 0

OK to Use Lindsay Lohan’s Name in a Song

So holds Lohan v. Perez (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 21, 2013), with regard to Pitbull’s line, So, I’m toptoein’, to keep flowin’, I got it locked up, like Lindsay Lohan. The court reasons — quite correctly, I think — that such references are protected under the First Amendment against a “right of publicity” (i.e., misappropriation of another’s […]

Continue Reading 0

Ohio Court Strikes Down Ban on “Lur[ing]” Under-14-Year-Olds to Accompany Person Without Parent’s Permission

From State v. [John D.] Goode (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 20, 2013): Mr. Goode was convicted of violating R.C. 2905.05(A), which provides, No person, by any means and without privilege to do so, shall knowingly solicit, coax, entice, or lure any child under fourteen years of age to accompany the person in any manner, including […]

Continue Reading 0

Christian Missionaries Arrested in Libya, Face Potential Death Penalty

The Guardian (UK) reports (thanks to Prof. Howard Friedman (Religion Clause) for the pointer): Four foreigners have been arrested in Libya on suspicion of being missionaries and distributing Christian literature, a charge that could carry the death penalty…. Libya retains a law from the Muammar Gaddafi era that makes proselytising a criminal offence potentially punishable […]

Continue Reading 0

State v. Brewington and the Blackmail Analogy

Here’s the second part of our amicus brief, which deals with the Court of Appeals’ analogy between general threats to harshly criticize someone and blackmail: B. The Court of Appeals’ Blackmail Analogy Is Unsound The Court of Appeals defended its reasoning by analogy to blackmail. 2013 WL 177923, *8. But, while properly crafted blackmail bans […]

Continue Reading 0

Indiana Advocacy, Political, or Journalist Groups?

I blogged last week about Brewington v. State (Ind. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2013), a decision that strikes me as unconstitutional, and as quite perilous for Indiana speakers: It basically concludes that harshly and repeatedly criticizing someone — in that case, a judge, but the law applies equally to legislators, other government officials, business leaders, […]

Continue Reading 0

The Sedition Act and the First Amendment

A commenter writes — apparently arguing in favor of the view that the First Amendment was originally understood as providing only narrow protection — that “The same [Congress] that [passed the First Amendment] passed the sedition act.” This turns out not to be so in any useful way (other than the obvious point that the […]

Continue Reading 0

Man Who Took off His Shirt at TSA Checkpoint, to Reveal Fourth Amendment Written on His Chest, May Proceed with First Amendment Claim [UPDATE: Note Correction]

So holds today’s Tobey v. Jones (4th Cir. Jan. 25, 2013): Mr. Tobey waited until there was a short line at the TSA screening checkpoint and then commenced the screening process by presenting his boarding pass and identification to the pre-screening agent. Mr. Tobey proceeded to the conveyor belt area and placed his belt, shoes, […]

Continue Reading 0

Equality vs. Liberty

The Center for Law and Religion Forum had a post a couple of weeks ago about a talk by Erwin Chemerinsky (dean of the new UC Irvine law school), in which he made a rather striking proposal. Indeed, Dean Chemerinsky has made the proposal in print several years ago, in an article titled Separate and […]

Continue Reading 0

Harshly Criticizing Judges (or Others) for Their Past Conduct = Crime?

That’s what Brewington v. State (Ind. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2013) appears to hold. The defendant may well have seemed like a potentially dangerous person, and he was also convicted of perjury and other crimes; moreover, the government argued that he threatened violence and not just criticism. But the court’s reasoning, which focused on the […]

Continue Reading 0

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes