Constitutional Law

What is the value of hundreds of years of precedent or unambiguously clear constitutional language compared to the personal preferences of six religious conservative justices currently on the United States Supreme Court?

The right to protest? Oh! I think you mean Pro Test. The Founding Fathers were really big on hormonal supplements. That's why they were so infatuated with people having Bear Arms.

Whither free speech?

My plug's prices are way cheaper than that.

What about campus culture makes it so unique that social shaming in this context poses such a unique threat?

Great title.

Because the problem with the killing of George Floyd was that someone was allowed to film it.

Yes, we still need the ERA.

People are getting this backward.

It's past time...

It is not a perfect system, but it is difficult to limit the press without overly limiting the press.

My work was recently involved in a larger debate about the power, and harm, of certain words.

Religious fear and hatred of nonbelievers is real, the question is whether legal mechanisms exist that nonbelievers can utilize to defend themselves. 

Here is the thing about conservative rhetoric of following the law as written and about not making policy: in practice conservative judges do the exact opposite.

Does questioning a panelist on microaggression -- even persistently -- warrant a professionalism concern card?

Combine a conservative religious ideology that fears and hates nonbelievers and has taken over much of the judiciary, with an ever-increasing nonbeliever population growth, and what you get is legal oppression. 

The Department of Justice has argued high school officials should have the power to monitor and punish off-campus student speech. 

A conversation about the free exercise doctrine generally and discussion on an important free exercise case heard by the Supreme Court this term.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to find greater hypocrisy on any issue than the kind exhibited by cancel culture alarmists.

The fact is nothing about this Supreme Court’s religious liberty doctrine reflects equality or liberty for all.