The four law firms filed lawsuits challenging Trump’s orders, alleging that the orders were unconstitutional and violated their First Amendment rights.

The four law firms filed lawsuits challenging Trump’s orders, arguing that the orders were unconstitutional and violated their First Amendment rights.

"Using the antitrust laws to challenge expressive conduct of this type interferes with commonplace forms of advocacy ... that are part of the fabric of our country and entitled to substantial First Amendment protections."

"Does the government seriously believe, for example, that Politico (owned by a German company) has no First Amendment rights?" the brief reads.

“No Californian should have to live in fear that exercising their First Amendment right will result in harassment and threats to their safety.”

NetChoice, whose members include Google and X, stated that the law violates the companies' First Amendment rights. U.S. District Judge Robert J. Shelby agreed, at least for now.

We are righting this wrong and protecting the First Amendment," he said.

These individuals, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota, said that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) personnel infringed on their First Amendment rights while the individuals were observing federal agents performing their

On June 16, she seemed concerned about Trump potentially violating the First Amendment by targeting Harvard.

The court went on to add that “the First Amendment ‘doubly protects religious speech.’” “These First Amendment protections extend to elementary school students expressing their sincere religious beliefs through voluntary clubs.

Kelly's statements "are entitled to First Amendment protection because they were neither 'directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action' nor 'likely to incite or produce such action,'" the legal complaint added, quoting from a previous court

The SFPD said officers began monitoring the assembly near Sansome and Washington streets at about 7 p.m. on June 8 as protesters engaged in "First Amendment activity."

Goode-Trufant responded: “I think that the corporation counsel's obligation is to make certain that we are serving justice and following the rule of law, and so I support the First Amendment in that situation.”

Supreme Court to decide if parents have a First Amendment right to video record school officials when discussing their children in private meetings.

One cannot argue that the First Amendment protects malicious lying against innocent victims any more than one would propose that the Second Amendment protects your right to shoot whomever you please, just to hurt him.

They argue that his arrest and the ongoing effort to deport him are a violation of his First Amendment rights. Khalil, 30, a Syrian national of Palestinian descent, recently graduated from Columbia University's master's program.

Hines’s First Amendment rights," U.S. Circuit Judge Don R. Willett wrote.

Vullo had qualified immunity and that the NRA didn't assert a strong enough First Amendment claim to overcome that immunity. The U.S.

He accused Meta of censoring “First Amendment-protected speech” instead of protecting children against “pedophile” content creators.

A more difficult question, which every single test-taker got wrong, asked what the primary purpose of the freedom of the press clause in the First Amendment was.

A federal judge later reversed the funding freeze, ruling that the government violated the First Amendment through its efforts to combat anti-Semitism. The Justice Department appealed the decision in December 2025.

During the oral argument on Dec. 9, NRSC attorney Noel Francisco said “the coordinated party spending limits are at war with this court’s recent First Amendment cases.”

Amendment.

First Choice filed suit to block the subpoena, alleging that New Jersey was violating its First Amendment rights, since the investigation was politically motivated.

of a crime—does not violate Defendant’s First Amendment right."

Supreme Court's 2001 decision, which held the limits do not violate the First Amendment, is still binding.

District Court Judge Andrea Wood found that the current route satisfies the First Amendment.

Groups that challenged the law are unlikely to succeed in their claims that the statute infringes on their First Amendment rights, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled.

One group that sponsored the bill said the text of the new law was carefully constructed to navigate First Amendment concerns.

Disney counters, arguing that while the First Amendment gives Ms. Carano the right to free speech, it equally gives the studio the right not to associate with that speech.