A British First Amendment wouldn’t save free speech
The solution is not to pass a new law, but to repeal those laws that limit freedom of expression
The solution is not to pass a new law, but to repeal those laws that limit freedom of expression
The losers in all this are not the hapless fools languishing in jail because of their crude online posts
The House bill’s new definition of antisemitic speech is disturbingly broad
Who gets to decide what speech falls foul of this new standard?
‘PLEASE REMOVE!!!’ one Biden official told Twitter
The former royal thinks he knows what’s best for Americans
Is Donald Trump’s expulsion from Twitter an attack on free speech? A great many Republicans are saying so. You certainly can call it ‘deplatforming’: when you lose your speaking invite, your social media posting rights or your book deal. Josh Hawley, a Republican Senator, has claimed that his First Amendment rights were violated by Simon & Schuster when they decided not to publish his book. It’s a problematic definition, since it means that Simon & Schuster are also violating my free speech by not publishing my books. And in fact, the rights of most aspiring authors on the planet. But of course, the First Amendment expressly refers to laws made