This year, and mostly because the Trump administration decided to challenge the entire model, the machinery has begun to malfunction and melt away. There is a very long way to go, but we finally have the answer to the question of this fourth branch’s legitimacy.
The Supreme Court will uphold as well-established the First Amendment right to engage in ideological ad boycotts. The question is whether the Trump administration will succeed in bulldozing this as a practical matter before it reaches the high court.
There is poetry in how the scholar called a “fringe epidemiologist” by the previous agency heads is now in charge.
No civil rights law on the books requires “viewpoint diversity” in university admissions or hiring or creates a protected class of students or faculty based on ideological views.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say Congress should fund a national media.
Would a determined executive ever fall back in the end on the core power asymmetry between the two branches—it has guns, and the judges don’t?
Not a day goes by when the New York Times does not manufacture some maudlin defense of the put-upon minions of the tax-funded managerial class. In this worldview, the agencies are always right, whereas any elected or appointed person seeking to rein them in or terminate them is attacking the “public interest.”
If the government is able to prove that his actions went beyond First Amendment protected speech, the courts may well resolve the issue in favor of the government.
Defunding NPR and PBS and all government-sponsored media isn’t just about saving taxpayers money, and it’s certainly not about placating Elon Musk.
If these regulations are an unnecessary hindrance for those recovering from the wildfires, why are they necessary at all?
Despite the media’s incessant insurrection chorus over the past three years and Congress’ Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, there is a dearth of evidence that those who participated in the riot did so with the ultimate goal of overthrowing the government and seizing its powers.
Lawfare involves the targeting of defendants based primarily on who they are rather than what they have done.
It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.”
Pavel Durov, who in 2014 fled Russia after the Kremlin “tightened its grip over the Internet” — only to find himself a prisoner in the West a decade later.
With an ideal president and legislature, we would pursue something like what is going on in Argentina today. Whole agencies need to be deleted entirely from the federal budget.
What stood out above all else was the way free speech on X worked to ferret out the real story, while actually driving forward the mainstream press to correct its errors and get the story right.
To access legal justice, pathways must exist. The access-to-legal-justice problem can be viewed as a lack of available pathways for people of all economic backgrounds, including those who can’t afford much, the middle class, and even the wealthy.
Despite sky is falling rhetoric from some quarters, this decision is hardly the end of the administrative state.
The majority opinion here has found a way to codify this new form of censorship that threatens the whole idea of free speech itself.
Mr. Trump isn’t the only victim of this ill-advised gag order. It violates your First Amendment rights and mine as well.
Judge Merchan has many sentencing options. We would not venture to predict which one he will select, though we are fairly certain, based on his trial rulings, that he will not be motivated by fairness or justice, but rather by the “get Trump” attitude that has dominated this case from beginning to end.
Had one of the individuals at the Constitutional Convention said, “Should we write in a power for the government to lend money?” the reply from everyone else would have been “No.”
The case offers direct parallels to the censorship of Covid-related information. The Biden White House repeatedly worked through third parties – including Meta, Twitter, and Google – to censor disfavored information.
In the big picture, the best way for the government to protect my safety would be for it to protect my freedom to look after myself.
Read by students, professors, and citizens, Capitalism Magazine provides over 9,000 free to read articles and essays from pro-reason, individual rights perspective.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.