Free Speech
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues
The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida’s order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students’ constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The ĚÇĐÄVlogand its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Free Speech
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Free Speech
Molina v. Book
Whether police officers violated clearly established First Amendment rights when they tear-gassed plaintiffs for serving as legal observers in a public protest.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2023
Free Speech
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the ĚÇĐÄVlogof Northern California, and the ĚÇĐÄVlogof Southern California filed amicus briefs in support of everyday people fighting for government transparency and accountability in two cases set for review by the U.S. Supreme Court this Term: O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2021
Free Speech
Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.
On September 25, 2017, the ACLU-PA filed suit on behalf of B.L., a high school sophomore who has been cheerleading since she was in fifth grade and was expelled from the team as punishment for out-of-school speech.
All Cases
150 Free Speech Cases
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2022
Free Speech
Shurtleff v. City of Boston
For more than a decade, Boston has allowed nearly 300 private groups to temporarily fly their flags outside of City Hall. Did the city violate the First Amendment when it denied Camp Constitution’s request to fly its flag for a single hour because the flag has a religious symbol?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2022
Free Speech
Shurtleff v. City of Boston
For more than a decade, Boston has allowed nearly 300 private groups to temporarily fly their flags outside of City Hall. Did the city violate the First Amendment when it denied Camp Constitution’s request to fly its flag for a single hour because the flag has a religious symbol?
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2022
Free Speech
Edgar v. Haines
The ĚÇĐÄVlogand the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed a lawsuit on behalf of five former public servants challenging the government’s “prepublication review” system, which prohibits millions of current and former government employees from writing or speaking about topics related to their government service without first obtaining government approval.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2022
Free Speech
Edgar v. Haines
The ĚÇĐÄVlogand the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed a lawsuit on behalf of five former public servants challenging the government’s “prepublication review” system, which prohibits millions of current and former government employees from writing or speaking about topics related to their government service without first obtaining government approval.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2022
Free Speech
+2 ĚÇĐÄVlog
Carmack v. Janny et al
The ĚÇĐÄVlog, along with Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and Colorado law firm DLA Piper, represent Mark Janny, an atheist whose religious-freedom rights were violated by his parole officer when Janny was sent to jail after refusing to take part in worship and religious activities.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2022
Free Speech
+2 ĚÇĐÄVlog
Carmack v. Janny et al
The ĚÇĐÄVlog, along with Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and Colorado law firm DLA Piper, represent Mark Janny, an atheist whose religious-freedom rights were violated by his parole officer when Janny was sent to jail after refusing to take part in worship and religious activities.
Court Case
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
ĚÇĐÄVlogv. CBP - FOIA Case for Records Relating to Government’s Aerial Surveillance of Protesters
In December 2021, the ĚÇĐÄVlogand NYCLU filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information from nine federal agencies—the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Protective Service (FPS), Marshals Service (USMS), and Secret Service (USSS)—about nationwide aerial surveillance and flight monitoring of protests in 2020 following the death of George Floyd.
Explore case
Court Case
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
ĚÇĐÄVlogv. CBP - FOIA Case for Records Relating to Government’s Aerial Surveillance of Protesters
In December 2021, the ĚÇĐÄVlogand NYCLU filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking information from nine federal agencies—the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Protective Service (FPS), Marshals Service (USMS), and Secret Service (USSS)—about nationwide aerial surveillance and flight monitoring of protests in 2020 following the death of George Floyd.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California
Whether California’s blanket demand for tax documents identifying the major donors to nonprofit organizations infringes the First Amendment right to associational privacy, in light of the state’s demonstrated inability to maintain the confidentiality of that information?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Free Speech
Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California
Whether California’s blanket demand for tax documents identifying the major donors to nonprofit organizations infringes the First Amendment right to associational privacy, in light of the state’s demonstrated inability to maintain the confidentiality of that information?