Page 13«..10..12131415..2030..»

Category Archives: First Amendment

Know Your Rights: Students in Higher Education & the First Amendment – New York Civil Liberties Union

Posted: January 27, 2024 at 3:52 am

Public Institutions

It depends. As with private universities, your public college or university can discipline you for your speech if it determines that the speech violates the university's student conduct rules, or other established rules and guidelines. However, that investigation and determination must adhere,first and foremost, to First Amendment protections (outlined in the general First Amendment section above), as well as to the rules outlined in the universitys student code of conduct so, knowledge of your college or universitys code of conduct and/or policies is essential.

Before a public institution disciplines a student or student group, such as by expelling the student or revoking official recognition from a group on campus, it must provide the student or student group with due process. This includes providing students with the names of witnesses against them, an opportunity to present a defense, and the results and findings of the hearing. Unless otherwise stated in their own rules, public institutions are not required to provide legal representation for students, allow them to bring a legal representative, allow students or student groups to cross-examine witnesses, or record the hearing.

Read the original:
Know Your Rights: Students in Higher Education & the First Amendment - New York Civil Liberties Union

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Know Your Rights: Students in Higher Education & the First Amendment – New York Civil Liberties Union

SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings – Society of Professional Journalists

Posted: at 3:52 am

Home > SPJ News > SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings

SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings

CONTACT: Ashanti Blaize-Hopkins, SPJ National President, ashanti.blaize@gmail.com Andrew Geronimo, Case Western Reserve University School of Law First Amendment Clinic, andrew.geronimo@case.edu Kim Tsuyuki, SPJ Communications Specialist, ktsuyuki@hq.spj.org

INDIANAPOLIS The Society of Professional Journalists is urging a federal appeals court to protect journalists First Amendment right to photograph, record, and redistribute images of court hearings that are livestreamed for remote viewing.

In a legal brief joined by the National Press Photographers Association, SPJ asks the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a federal district court ruling from Michigan, which found that there is no constitutionally protected right to create and publish screenshots of court proceedings even if the courts themselves televise the proceedings.

Although judges have been given latitude to exclude photojournalists from the physical courtroom on the grounds that cameras might be noisy or distracting, the same principle does not apply when a journalist, or other spectator, is recording the hearing in the privacy of a home or workplace, the brief argues: By self-publishing the audio or video of a proceeding, the judge has conceded that there is no harm in letting the public listen and watch.

The brief was filed Jan. 8 by attorneys Andrew Geronimo, Sara E. Coulter and Siobhan Gerber of the Milton and Charlotte Kramer First Amendment Law Clinic at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, who are providing pro-bono counsel to SPJ and NPPA.

The brief was filed in support of a Michigan lawyer, Nicholas Somberg, who is suing prosecutors for seeking sanctions against him after he took a screenshot of a hearing in which he was participating by Zoom and shared the image on Facebook. Prosecutors had initiated contempt proceedings against Somberg under a court rule that restricts the use of cameras inside the courtroom without the judges permission. A U.S. district judge threw out Sombergs lawsuit, agreeing with prosecutors that the rule against cameras inside courtrooms applies equally to a livestreamed remote hearing. Somberg is asking the Sixth Circuit to reinstate his case.

SPJ and NPPA ask the appeals court to overturn the district court, which failed to require the government to demonstrate why it is legitimate to extend the courtroom cameras ban beyond the walls of the courthouse. The organizations argue that the ban is unconstitutionally broad, prohibiting the re-use of any images of courtroom video, even in cases of great public concern that involve no sensitive privacy issues.

News media coverage of the courts serves an essential public-education function, enabling far more people than could ever sit in the courtroom to have the civic benefit of viewing the workings of the justice system for themselves, the brief argues. Video of judicial proceedings, whether broadcast by the news media or streamed directly by the court, provides the most complete record of what took place, rather than leaving the public to rely on second-hand accounts, the accuracy of which might be questioned.

The case is Somberg v. McDonald, No. 23-01872.

SPJ promotes the free flow of information vital to informing citizens; works to inspire and educate the next generation of journalists; and fights to protect First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and press. Support excellent journalism and fight for your right to know. Become a member, give to the Legal Defense Fund or give to the SPJ Foundation.

-END-

See more here:
SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings - Society of Professional Journalists

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings – Society of Professional Journalists

SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings – Editor And Publisher Magazine

Posted: at 3:52 am

SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings  Editor And Publisher Magazine

More here:
SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings - Editor And Publisher Magazine

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on SPJ co-authors legal brief supporting First Amendment right to record and publish livestreamed court hearings – Editor And Publisher Magazine

FCC’s Jessica Rosenworcel On Trump Broadcast License Threats: First Amendment Guides Us. – Insideradio.com

Posted: at 3:52 am

An election year is hard to avoid in Washington, even at the Federal Communications Commission.

Chair Jessica Rosenworcel is playing down the prospect that former President Donald Trump could make good on his recent threats to go after some TV networks that he views as hostile to his candidacy. The First Amendment is something that we take seriously, Rosenworcel said Thursday. It stands for the proposition that we cannot prohibit speech. The thing that is clearest to me is that we have licensing authority over broadcast stations, and its something that needs to be understood more widely and certainly in some of our candidate circles.

When reporters put the same question to Commissioner Brendan Carr, he declined to comment. As we move into election season, I'm not going to be making comments on every statement from candidates as they're working through this process, he said.

It is not the first time Trump has blown off steam toward his adversaries by suggesting the FCC should yank their licenses. He made similar comments in 2017. It drew a critical response from the National Association of Broadcasters, the Radio Television Digital News Association, and some in Congress, but ultimately little came of it.

In other FCC news, Commissioner Anna Gmez has made some staff changes, including those who are advising her on media issues. Deena Shetler will serve as Chief of Staff and advise Gomez on media and international matters. And Harsha Mudaliar will serve as Policy Advisor, focusing on media and technology issues.

Shetler most recently worked on Capitol Hill where she served as a research assistant for the Senate Subcommittee on Communications, Media, and Broadband. Previously, she interned at the FCC in the Office of Legislative Affairs.

Mudaliar joins Gmezs staff from Rosenworcels office, where she served as Deputy Chief of Staff for Administration. She has held numerous leadership roles at the FCC since taking her first job at the agency in 1996, including Deputy Chief of the Office of Economics and Analytics, Deputy Managing Director, Associate Chief of the Wireline Competition Bureau, and as a Legal Advisor to Commissioner Gloria Tristani. Mudaliar has also stepped away from the FCC on two occasions, to work at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) from 2010 to 2011 and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division from 2016-2017.

Gmez also announced Edyael Casaperalta will serve as Legal Advisor for Wireless, Public Safety and Consumer Protection. Hayley Steffen will serve as Legal Advisor for Wireline and Space. And Anna Holland will serve as Executive Assistant in her office.

I am pleased to announce that members of my acting staff have agreed to join my office long term Gmez said. They bring years of communications legal and policy experience along with a longstanding commitment to public service and a can-do attitude.

Read the original post:
FCC's Jessica Rosenworcel On Trump Broadcast License Threats: First Amendment Guides Us. - Insideradio.com

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on FCC’s Jessica Rosenworcel On Trump Broadcast License Threats: First Amendment Guides Us. – Insideradio.com

Star-Spangled Fascism: Extremists and the First Amendment – KPBS

Posted: at 3:52 am

Star-Spangled Fascism: Extremists and the First Amendment  KPBS

Original post:
Star-Spangled Fascism: Extremists and the First Amendment - KPBS

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Star-Spangled Fascism: Extremists and the First Amendment – KPBS

Letter writer reminds others about intent behind the First Amendment – Call Newspapers

Posted: at 3:52 am

I dont quite understand how anyone could misinterpret the First Amendment, as many people seem to do. It specifically states the following: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Our forefathers came to America to escape religious bigotry and to practice their religious beliefs without fear of retribution. So when people say we need to put religion into the government, they are defying the intent of the First Amendment.

Choosing to believe or not believe in a particular religion is a very personal decision. When someone says, I cant do that, its against my religion, thats perfectly acceptable. But when someone says, You cant do that, its against my religion. This is unacceptable for the obvious reason that it takes away the freedom to choose to believe differently than you.

When anyone imposes their beliefs on others, it diminishes the right of other people to think for themselves. Let us respect each others personal choices when it comes to religion. Isnt that what true freedom really means?

Kae Luppens

Lemay

Read the original post:
Letter writer reminds others about intent behind the First Amendment - Call Newspapers

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Letter writer reminds others about intent behind the First Amendment – Call Newspapers

Faith-based school chaplains would test First Amendment – Fort Wayne Journal Gazette

Posted: at 3:52 am

Indianas student-to-counselor ratio ranks worst in the nation, according to the 2023 State of the Indiana Girl Report published in September.

Two bills introduced in the General Assembly one in the House, the other in the Senate seek to fill the counselor void, but critics say their solution is unconstitutional and could end up further harming some childrens emotional and mental health.

House Bill 1192 and Senate Bill 50 would allow public and charter schools to employ chaplains, or approve them as volunteers, to counsel students and staff. Though school chaplains wouldnt be required to divulge privileged or confidential communications, the bills are written to invite skepticism as to the ultimate goal of allowing pastoral care.

The Senate version, authored by Sen. Stacey Donato, R-Logansport, says a chaplain may only provide secular assistance, unless the student (or their parent or guardian) gives consent for religious advice, guidance and support services. The House proposal of Rep. Doug Miller, R-Elkhart, does not include such language.

The primary role of chaplains is to provide pastoral or religious counseling to people in spiritual need, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana said in a statement. Allowing them to assume official positions whether paid or voluntary in public schools will create an environment ripe for religious coercion and indoctrination of students.

Without any oversight to prevent chaplains from imposing their own religious viewpoint on the children they counsel, HB 1192 and SB 50 could undermine the religious freedom of students of all faiths and no faith.

For a transgender student experiencing mental health concerns, especially in light of Senate Enrolled Act 480 that banned childrens gender-affirming care last year, having a chaplain provide counsel could be harmful.

The Indiana Youth Institute and Girl Coalition of Indiana examined mental health data and surveys completed by school-age children and found schools statewide employed just 1,494 counselors for more than 1 million students.

Proponents of HB 1192 and SB 50 likely will tout the proposals as remedies to the mental health needs of Hoosier students.

Chaplains are trained and certified to provide spiritual and emotional support. Lawmakers should leave mental health care services to the professional school counselors qualified to do that job.

Originally posted here:
Faith-based school chaplains would test First Amendment - Fort Wayne Journal Gazette

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Faith-based school chaplains would test First Amendment – Fort Wayne Journal Gazette

No, There Is No First Amendment Right to Block a Roadway – AOL

Posted: at 3:52 am

On January 20, the official Twitter account for Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) warned that passengers might be delayed due to a group in vehicles exercising first amendment rights in roadway, prompting a backlash from readers and a Community Note.

The delays were caused by at least six vehicles driving slowly on the roads approaching the airport, many of which flew Palestinian flags out of windows and sunroofs.

The blocking of public roadways is not protected by the First Amendment, however, and restrictions on such activity by state and federal authorities is generally considered constitutional.

While the First Amendment protects a wide range of free speech activities, including the rights to assemble and protest, the Supreme Court has long recognized the governments right to restrict speech in certain circumstances. Generally speaking, the government may impose content-neutral restrictions on the time, place, and manner of expression, so long as they are narrowly tailored to a substantial government interest, Eugene Volokh, a professor of law at UCLA and First Amendment expert, told The Dispatch Fact Check.

So, while the state of Virginia, where DCA is located, could not constitutionally restrict demonstrations in roadways only for pro-Palestinian protests, it is fully constitutional for it to restrict the blocking of roadways in general. In fact, Virginia does just this: The state has laws against both purposefully impeding the progress of vehicles on highways and the obstruction of free passage of others.

Courts have consistently found that theres a substantial interest in allowing people to get around from place to place and to use the U.S. roadways for the purpose they were designed for, which is to have people go from place A to place B, Volokh explained. The government is entitled to protect that and limitsin fact has basically a presumptive prohibition ondemonstrations on public streets.

Arrest is a common outcome across the U.S. for individuals protesting in public roadways. On January 9, 2024, more than 300 people were arrested for blocking roads and bridges in New York City during a pro-Palestinian protest, and three climate protesters were arrested for blocking lanes on the George Washington Memorial Parkway in April 2023. Nobody has a right to block other peoples ability to get where theyre going, Volokh said.

If you have a claim you would like to see us fact check, please send us an email at factcheck@thedispatch.com. If you would like to suggest a correction to this piece or any other Dispatch article, please email corrections@thedispatch.com.

Read more at The Dispatch

The Dispatch is a new digital media company providing engaged citizens with fact-based reporting and commentary, informed by conservative principles. Sign up for free.

The rest is here:
No, There Is No First Amendment Right to Block a Roadway - AOL

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on No, There Is No First Amendment Right to Block a Roadway – AOL

ESGEN and Sunergy Announce First Amendment Disclosure – TipRanks.com – TipRanks

Posted: at 3:52 am

ESGEN and Sunergy Announce First Amendment Disclosure - TipRanks.com  TipRanks

Read the original here:
ESGEN and Sunergy Announce First Amendment Disclosure - TipRanks.com - TipRanks

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on ESGEN and Sunergy Announce First Amendment Disclosure – TipRanks.com – TipRanks

First Amendment Bowled Over by Lanham Act Again – The National Law Review

Posted: at 3:52 am

First Amendment Bowled Over by Lanham Act Again  The National Law Review

Read the original here:
First Amendment Bowled Over by Lanham Act Again - The National Law Review

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on First Amendment Bowled Over by Lanham Act Again – The National Law Review

Page 13«..10..12131415..2030..»