Federal judge says Texas law requiring book ratings is unconstitutional; KUT News, October 22, 2025

 Bill Zeeble, KUT News; Federal judge says Texas law requiring book ratings is unconstitutional

"The 2023 Texas law requiring booksellers and publishers to rate their books based on sexual content and references has been declared unconstitutional in a Waco court.

A federal judge on Tuesday declared House Bill 900, also known as the READER Act, violates the Constitution. The ruling makes permanent a lower court's temporary injunction that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later upheld.

The law firm Haynes Boone, which represented the coalition of plaintiffs that sued to block the law, said in a statement the ruling is a "major First Amendment victory."

"The READER Act would have imposed impossible obligations on booksellers and limited access to literature, including classic works, for students across Texas," attorney Laura Lee Prather said in the statement.

HB 900 sought to restrict which books are available in school libraries and required booksellers to rate their own books based on sexual content. The Texas Education Agency could have overridden the ratings to prevent school libraries from obtaining books."

Colleges weigh whether to sign onto Trump plan or forgo federal benefits; The Washington Post, October 3, 2025

Susan Svrluga

, 

Danielle Douglas-Gabriel

 and 

Emily Davies

, The Washington Post; Colleges weigh whether to sign onto Trump plan or forgo federal benefits

"The Trump administration this week offered a select group of universities the opportunity to score priority access for federal funding, prompting an enthusiastic and swift response from a university leader in Texas, who called it “an honor.”

But the other schools that received the 10-page proposal Wednesday night were largely silent Thursday, as they considered the wide-ranging conservative terms that some experts warned would trample on free-speech rights and threaten finances and academic freedom at top universities.

The Washington Post first reported this week that the White House intended to launch a campaign to bring colleges into compliance with Trump’s ideological priorities by offering a competitive advantage to those that sign on...

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) threatened Thursday to yank billions of dollars’ worth of funding from any school in the state that signed onto the agreement, writing on social media that the state would not “BANKROLL SCHOOLS THAT SELL OUT THEIR STUDENTS, PROFESSORS, RESEARCHERS, AND SURRENDER ACADEMIC FREEDOM.”...

White House officials signaled last week that they intended to launch a campaign to bring colleges into compliance with Trump’s ideological priorities."

California vows to ‘instantly’ cut funding to universities that cave to Trump ‘compact’; The Guardian, October 2, 2025

Lois Beckett, The Guardian ; California vows to ‘instantly’ cut funding to universities that cave to Trump ‘compact’

"Any California universities that sign the Trump administration’s proposed “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” will “instantly” lose their state funding, California governor Gavin Newsom said in a statement.

The Trump administration on Wednesday offered nine prominent universities, including the University of Southern California, the chance to sign a “compact” that asks the universities to close academic departments that “purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas”, limit the proportion of international undergraduate students to 15% , accept the administration’s definition of gender and ban the consideration of race or sex in hiring and admissions, in exchange for “substantial and meaningful federal grants”.

Newsom’s office described the offer as “nothing short of a hostile takeover of America’s universities”.

“It would impose strict government-mandated definitions of academic terms, erase diversity, and rip control away from campus leaders to install government-mandated conservative ideology in its place,” the governor’s office said in a statement. “It even dictates how schools must spend their own endowments. Any institution that resists could be hit with crushing fines or stripped of federal research funding.”

“If any California University signs this radical agreement, they’ll lose billions in state funding – including Cal Grants – instantly. California will not bankroll schools that sell out their students, professors, researchers, and surrender academic freedom,” Newsom said in the statement. Cal Grants is the state’s $2.8bn student financial aid program."

West Point is violating the First Amendment with a crackdown on professors, lawsuit says; AP, September 22, 2025

LARRY NEUMEISTER, AP; West Point is violating the First Amendment with a crackdown on professors, lawsuit says

"The U.S. Military Academy at West Point is banning opinions by professors in the classroom and some books and courses in a crackdown that violates the First Amendment, a law professor at the military school said in a lawsuit Monday seeking class action status.

Tim Bakken filed the lawsuit in Manhattan federal court and named the school and its leaders as defendants. He said he wants to protect free speech and the right to academic freedom at an institution where he has flourished despite his public criticisms of the academy and the U.S. military.

Bakken also noted in the lawsuit that he has a contract with a publisher for a book that is critical of some aspects of West Point and doesn’t want to seek approval from the school’s leadership prior to its publication because “it is very likely such approval will be withheld.”"

Trump Says Critical Coverage of Him Is ‘Really Illegal’; The New York Times, September 19, 2025

Luke Broadwater, The New York Times; Trump Says Critical Coverage of Him Is ‘Really Illegal’

[Kip Currier: The most objective (and nicest) way to respond to Trump's assertion that critical reporting on him is "really illegal" is that it is legally incorrect and factually untrue. Whether Trump is regrettably misinformed in stating this falsehood or intentionally uttering this inaccuracy is less material than the fact that he is objectively wrong.

There are countries where it is illegal to say critical things about heads of nations: Russia. China. North Korea. Iran. Saudi Arabia. Turkey. Thailand. Others. Indeed, criticizing the head of state will likely get one defenestrated (as tragically happens all too often in Russia), killed in other ways, tortured, jailed, or disappeared.

Fortunately, it is not (yet) illegal to say negative things about U.S. Presidents at present. And it never has been, since the founding of the country in 1776 when the monarchical dictates of England's King George III were soundly declined by the American colonists. The t-shirt below proudly (and wholly truthfully) proclaims that historical truth that occurred in America 249 years ago:

[Excerpt]

"President Trump said Friday that news reporters who cover his administration negatively have broken the law, a significant broadening of his attacks on journalists and their First Amendment right to critique the government.

A day after asserting that broadcasters should potentially lose their licenses over negative news coverage of him, Mr. Trump escalated his condemnations of the press, suggesting reporters were lawbreakers.

“They’ll take a great story and they’ll make it bad,” he said, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office. “See, I think that’s really illegal.”

Mr. Trump did not cite a specific law he said he believed had been violated. It remained unclear Friday why Mr. Trump believed negative news coverage, which every president has faced and is protected by the Constitution, would be “really illegal.” The White House did not respond to a request for comment Friday evening."

Trump Snaps at Ted Cruz’s Shock Warning About Free Speech; The Daily Beast, September 19, 2025

Farrah Tomazin, The Daily Beast; Trump Snaps at Ted Cruz’s Shock Warning About Free Speech

[Kip Currier: The President of the United States takes the oath of office to defend the Constitution of the United States.

Does the individual quoted below -- in his own verbatim words -- sound like someone who understands the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?]

[Excerpt]

"But speaking in the Oval Office on Friday afternoon, Trump described Carr as “an incredible American patriot” who had shown courage for taking on broadcast networks that criticized him. 

“I disagree with Ted Cruz,” he told reporters.

“I think Brendan Carr doesn’t like to see the airwaves be used illegally and incorrectly, and purposely horribly.

“He doesn’t like to see a person that won the election in a landslide get 97% bad publicity before the election.

“(The networks) have to show honesty and integrity... When they take a great success, like you often do, and you make it into like it’s a loser, or you put a negative spin on it, I don’t think that’s right. So I think Brendan Carr is a great American.”

Yancey residents plan lawsuit in response to July 1 library takeover by county over Pride display; Asheville Citizen Times, June 13, 2025

Johnny Casey, Asheville Citizen Times; Yancey residents plan lawsuit in response to July 1 library takeover by county over Pride display

"Edwards pointed to the multiple protests in which residents marched on Burnsville Town Square in support of the local library, and said the local library has been a bright spot for many residents dealing with hardships, particularly during the county's Tropical Storm Helene recovery.

"I care that the little boy with Down Syndrome who gets his therapy at the library won't start his session without getting a hug from me," Edwards said. "I care that a woman who lost her father turned to reading and rediscovered a passion for reading to help her cope.

"I care about the thousands and thousands of people we've helped after Helene find resources, fill out forms, send paperwork to agencies, and mostly just by listening to their stories. I never once asked somebody who walked through those library doors who they voted for, who they pray to or who they have at home that they love. Every patron interaction starts with a simple question: 'How can I help you?'...

Landon Beaver is born and raised in Yancey County and has been following the library takeover in his hometown since 2023, when the commissioners proposed the takeover.

Beaver is helping organize a First Amendment lawsuit in order, according to the Our Voice Our Library website, "to try to prevent the Yancey County Board of Commissioners from wresting control of the library for political purposes...

According to the Our Library Our Voice website, the team hopes to set a legal precedent that will protect libraries like Jackson County and Yancey County all across North Carolina.​"

Florida again argues books ban are 'government speech,' not prohibited by First Amendment; Tallahassee Democrat, November 19, 2024

 Douglas Soule, USA TODAY NETWORK via Tallahassee Democrat; Florida again argues books ban are 'government speech,' not prohibited by First Amendment

"In yet another case, Florida's government is arguing that book removals in public schools are "government speech," meaning they are unrestricted by the First Amendment.

It's a controversial legal argument, which free speech advocates have called "authoritarian," but one that the state has been particularly passionate about over the last year. Attorney General Ashley Moody's office even recently sent a representative to make it on behalf of a Texas community's public library...

The state's defense of the law and the book removal decisions by school districts goes beyond the government speech argument. It also argues that governments don't even have an obligation to "provide benefits" such as school libraries."

‘It’s the First Amendment, stupid’: Federal judge blasts DeSantis administration for threats against TV stations; CNN, October 18, 2024

Liam Reilly and Brian Stelter, , CNN; ‘It’s the First Amendment, stupid’: Federal judge blasts DeSantis administration for threats against TV stations

"“To keep it simple for the State of Florida: it’s the First Amendment, stupid.”

That’s what a federal judge wrote Thursday as he sided with local TV stations in an extraordinary dispute over a pro-abortion rights television ad.

Chief U.S. District Judge Mark E. Walker of the Northern District of Florida granted a temporary restraining order against Florida’s surgeon general after the state health department threatened to bring criminal charges against broadcasters airing the ad."

“We Are a Relatively Easy Punching Bag”; Slate, October 3, 2024

LAURA MILLER , Slate; “We Are a Relatively Easy Punching Bag”

"While it’s not unusual for other industries to dedicate staff to influencing or changing public policy, it’s virtually unheard of in the relatively sleepy world of book publishing. Rosalie Stewart, however, has just been hired as Penguin Random House’s senior public policy manager, a new position that will fight the recent explosion in book-banning campaigns at schools and public libraries. At present, for example, officials in Texas and Iowa have attempted to argue that the book collections held by schools and libraries constitute “government speech” and are therefore not protected by the First Amendment. This bid to redefine the nature of public libraries was rejected by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Iowa, but for Texas, the matter is being weighed by the notorious extremists on the “rogue” 5th Circuit. I spoke with Stewart recently about the battle before her. Our conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity....

There have been two book-banning reports recently from the ALA and PEN America. The first said that book challenges are slowing down, and the second said that banning attempts have ramped up. Could you explain why there would be that difference?

My colleagues—my former colleagues, I should say—at ALA are very good at what they do, and they’re very smart. As a professional association, they just have a different focus in terms of what they’re counting. They’re focused on a very specific definition of a “book ban.” They only count book removals. But we know that this censorship is playing itself out in different ways. Not only are books being challenged, removed, and then put back on the shelf, but there is soft censorship. There’s a chilling effect in terms of the books that people are buying and teaching. I think that PEN America’s definition is a little more expansive and draws on a wider variety of sources. Censorship is not going down. Book banning is not fading away. That’s not what we’re hearing from people out there. That’s a major challenge: How do we fight back against this on such a diffuse battlefield? It’s happening at the state legislatures; it’s happening at the school boards; and it’s happening at the agency level."

Judge blocks California’s new AI law in case over Kamala Harris deepfake; TechCrunch, October 2, 2024

Maxwell Zeff, Tech Crunch ; Judge blocks California’s new AI law in case over Kamala Harris deepfake

"A federal judge blocked one of California’s new AI laws on Wednesday, less than two weeks after it was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom. Shortly after signing AB 2839, Newsom suggested it could be used to force Elon Musk to take down an AI deepfake of Vice President Kamala Harris he had reposted (sparking a petty online battle between the two). However, a California judge just ruled the state can’t force people to take down election deepfakes – not yet, at least.

AB 2839 targets the distributors of AI deepfakes on social media, specifically if their post resembles a political candidate and the poster knows it’s a fake that may confuse voters. The law is unique because it does not go after the platforms on which AI deepfakes appear, but rather those who spread them. AB 2839 empowers California judges to order the posters of AI deepfakes to take them down or potentially face monetary penalties.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the original poster of that AI deepfake – an X user named Christopher Kohls – filed a lawsuit to block California’s new law as unconstitutional just a day after it was signed. Kohls’ lawyer wrote in a complaint that the deepfake of Kamala Harris is satire that should be protected by the First Amendment.

On Wednesday, United States district judge John Mendez sided with Kohls. Mendez ordered a preliminary injunction to temporarily block California’s attorney general from enforcing the new law against Kohls or anyone else, with the exception of audio messages that fall under AB 2839.

Read for yourself what Judge Mendez said in his decision:..

It’s nevertheless a big win for Elon Musk’s camp of free speech posters on X. In the days following Newsom signing AB 2839 into law, Musk and his usual allies posted a series of AI deepfakes that tested California’s new law."

Only the First Amendment Can Protect Students, Campuses and Speech; The New York Times, September 6, 2024

Cass R. Sunstein , The New York Times; Only the First Amendment Can Protect Students, Campuses and Speech

"To answer those questions, we should turn to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that Congress “shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” Those words provide the right foundation for forging a new consensus about the scope and importance of free speech in higher education.

As a rallying cry, that consensus should endorse the greatest sentence ever written by a Supreme Court justice. In 1943, Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote, “Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard.”

It is true that private colleges and universities, unlike public ones, are not subject to the First Amendment, which applies only to public officials and institutions. If Harvard, Stanford, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Pomona or Colby wants to restrict speech, the First Amendment does not stand in their way.

Still, most institutions of higher learning, large or small, would do well to commit themselves to following the First Amendment of their own accord.

First Amendment doctrine, developed over the centuries, provides excellent guidance."

Federal judge blocks enforcement of Iowa’s book ban law; Iowa Public Radio, December 29, 2023

 Grant Gerlock, Iowa Public Radio ; Federal judge blocks enforcement of Iowa’s book ban law

"A federal judge has blocked the state of Iowa from enforcing major portions of an education law, SF 496, which has caused school districts to pull hundreds of books from library shelves.

The temporary injunction prevents enforcement of a ban on books with sexually explicit content, which the judge in the case said likely violates the First Amendment. It also blocks a section barring instruction relating to sexual orientation and gender identity in elementary school, which he called “void for vagueness.”

The decision follows a hearing last week that combined arguments from two separate challenges against the law signed by Gov. Kim Reynolds in May. A lawsuit brought by LGBTQ students calls the law discriminatory while another from a group of educators and the publisher Penguin Random House claims it violates their freedom of speech.

Enforcement provisions in the law that apply to book removals were set to take effect January 1...

Judge Stephen Locher said in his ruling released late Friday afternoon that the court was unable to find another school library book restriction “even remotely similar to Senate File 496.” Where lawmakers should use a scalpel, he said, SF 496 is a “bulldozer” that has pulled books out of schools that are widely regarded as important works.

“The underlying message is that there is no redeeming value to any such book even if it is a work of history, self-help guide, award-winning novel, or other piece of serious literature,” Locher wrote. “In effect, the Legislature has imposed a puritanical ‘pall of orthodoxy’ over school libraries.”"

What we’re watching at the start of new Supreme Court term; The Washington Post, October 2, 2023

Tobi Raji

, 

Theodoric Meyer

 and 

Leigh Ann Caldwell

, The Washington Post; What we’re watching at the start of new Supreme Court term

"2. Lindke v. Freed, O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier (Oct. 31)

There are several cases on the court’s docket this term that will tackle the future of online speech. The first two — Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier — will seek to answer whether the First Amendment prohibits public officials from blocking constituents.

• (“Two years ago, the justices dismissed a similar challenge to Trump’s efforts to block critics on Twitter, after he lost reelection and his Twitter account was suspended,” Robertwrites.)

The high court will also debate the constitutionality of laws passed in Texas and Florida that regulate the tech industry’s content-moderation policies. They are Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton. Conservatives argue that social media platforms are censoring their viewpoints, while the companies argue that the new laws violate their First Amendment right to choose what to publish on their platforms."

Report on Anti-Gay Slur Could Put Local News Site Out of Business; The New York Times , August 15, 2023

Jeremy W. Peters  , The New York Times; Report on Anti-Gay Slur Could Put Local News Site Out of Business

"Some First Amendment advocates said the playbook was relatively easy to replicate: A public official unhappy with the coverage sues, creating crushing costs for an outlet."

Florida school district sued for violating first amendment rights with book bans; The Guardian, May 17, 2023

Erum Salam, The Guardian; Florida school district sued for violating first amendment rights with book bans

"In a statement, PEN America’s CEO, Suzanne Nossel, said: “Children in a democracy must not be taught that books are dangerous. The freedom to read is guaranteed by the constitution. In Escambia county, state censors are spiriting books off shelves in a deliberate attempt to silence pluralism and diversity. In a nation built on free speech, this cannot stand. The law demands that the Escambia county school district put removed or restricted books back on library shelves where they belong.”"

A Yale Psychiatrist’s Tweet About Dershowitz, Her Dismissal, and a Lawsuit; The New York Times, March 26, 2021

 Mihir Zaveri, The New York Times; A Yale Psychiatrist’s Tweet About Dershowitz, Her Dismissal, and a Lawsuit

The psychiatrist, Bandy X. Lee, said she was let go after the lawyer Alan M. Dershowitz complained to the university. Yale said she violated ethics rules against diagnosing public figures, her lawsuit claims.

"Others have questioned the relevance of the Goldwater rule. Jonathan Moreno, a bioethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said he had not heard of anyone being disciplined by the American Psychiatric Association for violating the rule, even though people repeatedly broke it.

He also said professionals in other medical fields routinely comment in the press about the health of public figures."

Violence at Capitol and beyond reignites a debate over America's long-held defense of extremist speech; CNN, January 19, 2021

Eliott C. McLaughlin, CNN ; Violence at Capitol and beyond reignites a debate over America's long-held defense of extremist speech

"With most Americans hoping this week's expected inauguration protests look nothing like the Capitol siege, questions emerge about unrestrained free expression, long championed by First Amendment theorists as a benefit to society, no matter how ugly and hateful."

After a long legal struggle, Seattle band Thunderpussy is granted a U.S. trademark; The Seattle Times, April 5, 2020

Brendan Kiley, The Seattle Times; After a long legal struggle, Seattle band Thunderpussy is granted a U.S. trademark

"“There are a great many immoral and scandalous ideas in the world (even more than there are swearwords), and the Lanham Act covers them all,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the court’s opinion. “It therefore violates the First Amendment.” She also noted a lack of consistency in how the USPTO interpreted the Lanham Act, approving some trademarks and rejecting others that used the same potentially offensive language.

Kerr, Thunderpussy’s attorney, had argued the same point in his appeal to the USPTO.

“I mentioned over 40 trademark applications that had been accepted that included the word ‘pussy,’ ” he said. “Human discretion enters into the process, which is one person forming an opinion based on an internet search — but the implications for the band are enormous.”

The wheels of bureaucracy turned and, on April 4, Kerr finally received a letter from the USPTO granting Thunderpussy registered trademark number 6,021,338."

Anti-harassment policy raises First Amendment questions; University of Pittsburgh University Times, November 18, 2019

Marty Levine, University of Pittsburgh University Times; Anti-harassment policy raises First Amendment questions

"Members of the University Senate’s Faculty Affairs committee say they have met with University officials and voiced concerns that a proposed new anti-harassment measure may potentially stifle classroom discussion and require the entire Pitt community to report suspicious speech to University authorities.

After the meeting, the policy was pulled from a vote before Faculty Assembly."