Free Speech

Featured

U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
Molina v. Book

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.
Molina V. Book. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2023
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed

Free Speech

O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed

The ACLU, the Ƶof Northern California, and the Ƶof 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.
O’connor-ratcliff V. Garnier And Lindke V. Freed. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2021
Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.

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.
Mahanoy Area School District V. B.l.. Explore Case.

All Cases

158 Free Speech Cases

Khalil v. Trump
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
Khalil V. Trump. Explore Case.
New York
Mar 2025
Khalil v. Trump

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.
Khalil V. Trump. Explore Case.
Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts
Rhode Island
Mar 2025

Free Speech

Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts

On March 6, 2025, the ACLU; the Ƶof Rhode Island; Lynette Labinger, cooperating attorney for the Ƶof 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 “federal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology,” pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, and a related prohibition on funding any projects that appear to “promote” such messages.
Explore case
Rhode Island Latino Arts V. National Endowment For The Arts. Explore Case.
Rhode Island
Mar 2025
Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts

Free Speech

Rhode Island Latino Arts v. National Endowment for the Arts

On March 6, 2025, the ACLU; the Ƶof Rhode Island; Lynette Labinger, cooperating attorney for the Ƶof 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 “federal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology,” pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, and a related prohibition on funding any projects that appear to “promote” such messages.
Rhode Island Latino Arts V. National Endowment For The Arts. Explore Case.
City of Kalispell v. Doman
Montana Supreme Court
Feb 2025

Free Speech

+2 Ƶ

City of Kalispell v. Doman

This case asks whether the state can arrest, charge, and convict someone under Montana’s 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’s State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the Ƶof Montana, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant arguing that the officer’s 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
City Of Kalispell V. Doman. Explore Case.
Montana Supreme Court
Feb 2025
City of Kalispell v. Doman

Free Speech

+2 Ƶ

City of Kalispell v. Doman

This case asks whether the state can arrest, charge, and convict someone under Montana’s 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’s State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the Ƶof Montana, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant arguing that the officer’s 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.
City Of Kalispell V. Doman. Explore Case.
NYCLU v. New York State Office of Court Administration
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—with important implications for people’s rights—the New York Civil Liberties Union requested access to it under New York’s Freedom of Information Law. The agency denied the request, so the NYCLU sued. The NYCLU and the ACLU’s 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
Nyclu V. New York State Office Of Court Administration. Explore Case.
New York Supreme Court
Feb 2025
NYCLU v. New York State Office of Court Administration

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—with important implications for people’s rights—the New York Civil Liberties Union requested access to it under New York’s Freedom of Information Law. The agency denied the request, so the NYCLU sued. The NYCLU and the ACLU’s 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.
Nyclu V. New York State Office Of Court Administration. Explore Case.
Doe v. Alwan
New York Supreme Court
Jan 2025

Free Speech

Doe v. Alwan

The Ƶand civil rights firm Wang Hecker LLP are representing a Columbia University faculty organization against claims that their speech in defense of students’ rights to free speech and protest injured several students.
Explore case
Doe V. Alwan. Explore Case.
New York Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Doe v. Alwan

Free Speech

Doe v. Alwan

The Ƶand civil rights firm Wang Hecker LLP are representing a Columbia University faculty organization against claims that their speech in defense of students’ rights to free speech and protest injured several students.
Doe V. Alwan. Explore Case.
45
6
78...