Your fact-checks will appear here
The First Amendment protection is often invoked in cases related to the Brandenburg test, focusing on the protection of speech and its limitations.
The debate over how prosecutors and defense teams treat Donald Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech splits into two principal legal arguments: that the speech can be evidence of criminal wrongdoing—includin...
Federal appeals courts have not produced a uniform, definitive rule that streaming child sexual abuse material (CSAM) without saving a file always constitutes “possession”; lower courts and commentato...
Courts apply the Brandenburg test by asking whether speech was “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and was “likely to incite or produce such action,” a standard articulated in ...
Yes — retired officers have sometimes prevailed in federal litigation challenging retirement‑grade reductions, usually not by securing an across‑the‑board rule against the practice but by persuading c...
A narrow reading of federal law shows that mere factual contribution or truthful speech is generally not itself a federal domestic-terrorism crime, but providing information or resources that material...
Federal law already reaches “accessing with intent to view” certain child sexual material transmitted via interstate commerce, and several states have statutes broader than mere possession that can cr...