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鈥檚 order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students鈥� constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The 糖心Vlogand 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鈥機onnor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the 糖心Vlogof Northern California, and the 糖心Vlogof 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鈥機onnor-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
Massachusetts
Mar 2025
Free Speech
Schiff v. Office of Personnel Management
Explore case
Massachusetts
Mar 2025
Free Speech
Schiff v. Office of Personnel Management
New York
Mar 2025
Free Speech
Immigrants' Rights
Khalil v. Trump
Whether a legal permanent resident of the U.S. can be arrested and detained on the basis of their political speech and advocacy.
Explore case
New York
Mar 2025
Free Speech
Immigrants' Rights
Khalil v. Trump
Whether a legal permanent resident of the U.S. can be arrested and detained on the basis of their political speech and advocacy.
Rhode Island
Mar 2025
Free Speech
Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts
On March 6, 2025, the ACLU; the 糖心Vlogof Rhode Island; Lynette Labinger, cooperating attorney for the 糖心Vlogof Rhode Island; and David Cole filed a federal lawsuit against the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), challenging a new requirement that all grant applicants certify that 鈥渇ederal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology,鈥� pursuant to President Trump鈥檚 Executive Order 14168, and a related prohibition on funding any projects that appear to 鈥減romote鈥� such messages.
Explore case
Rhode Island
Mar 2025
Free Speech
Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts
On March 6, 2025, the ACLU; the 糖心Vlogof Rhode Island; Lynette Labinger, cooperating attorney for the 糖心Vlogof Rhode Island; and David Cole filed a federal lawsuit against the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), challenging a new requirement that all grant applicants certify that 鈥渇ederal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology,鈥� pursuant to President Trump鈥檚 Executive Order 14168, and a related prohibition on funding any projects that appear to 鈥減romote鈥� such messages.
New York Supreme Court
Feb 2025
Free Speech
Smart Justice
NYCLU v. New York State Office of Court Administration
This case in the New York Court of Appeals (the highest New York state court) asks whether a government agency can conceal guidance that it issues to judges on how to apply the law in adjudicating cases. A few years ago, news reporting brought to light that a New York administrative agency has a practice of issuing such guidance to state court judges without disclosing it to the public. Because the agency's guidance informs how judges decide cases鈥攚ith important implications for people鈥檚 rights鈥攖he New York Civil Liberties Union requested access to it under New York鈥檚 Freedom of Information Law. The agency denied the request, so the NYCLU sued. The NYCLU and the ACLU鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative are arguing that the public is entitled to the guidance and that there is a strong public interest in the transparent administration of justice.
Explore case
New York Supreme Court
Feb 2025
Free Speech
Smart Justice
NYCLU v. New York State Office of Court Administration
This case in the New York Court of Appeals (the highest New York state court) asks whether a government agency can conceal guidance that it issues to judges on how to apply the law in adjudicating cases. A few years ago, news reporting brought to light that a New York administrative agency has a practice of issuing such guidance to state court judges without disclosing it to the public. Because the agency's guidance informs how judges decide cases鈥攚ith important implications for people鈥檚 rights鈥攖he New York Civil Liberties Union requested access to it under New York鈥檚 Freedom of Information Law. The agency denied the request, so the NYCLU sued. The NYCLU and the ACLU鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative are arguing that the public is entitled to the guidance and that there is a strong public interest in the transparent administration of justice.
Montana Supreme Court
Feb 2025
Free Speech
+2 糖心Vlog
City of Kalispell v. Doman
This case asks whether the state can arrest, charge, and convict someone under Montana鈥檚 obstruction statute for exercising their federal and state constitutional right to record police officers in public spaces. The defendant was filming a traffic stop when police instructed him to move farther away. When he did not move as far as they wanted, they arrested him for obstructing a peace officer. The ACLU鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the 糖心Vlogof Montana, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant arguing that the officer鈥檚 refusal to allow the defendant to peacefully record police activity from a public sidewalk was, in effect, a content-based restriction on speech that could not be justified under strict scrutiny. Even if the restriction was not content-based, our brief argues that it is not a reasonable time place or manner restriction.
Explore case
Montana Supreme Court
Feb 2025
Free Speech
+2 糖心Vlog
City of Kalispell v. Doman
This case asks whether the state can arrest, charge, and convict someone under Montana鈥檚 obstruction statute for exercising their federal and state constitutional right to record police officers in public spaces. The defendant was filming a traffic stop when police instructed him to move farther away. When he did not move as far as they wanted, they arrested him for obstructing a peace officer. The ACLU鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the 糖心Vlogof Montana, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant arguing that the officer鈥檚 refusal to allow the defendant to peacefully record police activity from a public sidewalk was, in effect, a content-based restriction on speech that could not be justified under strict scrutiny. Even if the restriction was not content-based, our brief argues that it is not a reasonable time place or manner restriction.