Tech24 Deals Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the Tech24 Deals Content Network
  2. Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

    McConnell v. FEC (2003) (in part) Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding campaign finance laws and free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The court held 5–4 that the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment ...

  3. Buckley v. Valeo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo

    Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance. A majority of justices held that, as provided by section 608 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, limits on election expenditures are unconstitutional. In a per curiam (by the Court) opinion, they ruled that expenditure limits ...

  4. United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech...

    United States free speech exceptions. The Bill of Rights in the National Archives. In the United States, some categories of speech are not protected by the First Amendment. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Constitution protects free speech while allowing limitations on certain categories of speech. [ 1]

  5. Freedom of movement under United States law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under...

    Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." [ 1] However, the Supreme Court did not invest the federal government with the authority to protect freedom of movement. Under the "privileges and immunities" clause, this authority was given to the states, a ...

  6. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment...

    [17] [39] Analysts believed that because the Court agreed to hear this case, there were unanswered questions between the protection of free speech from the First Amendment, and the legal enforcement of protecting minors from unprotected free speech such as through restrictions on the sales of pornography to minors.

  7. Justice Dept. says social media giants may be 'intentionally ...

    techcrunch.com/2018/09/05/justice-dept-says...

    Social media companies aren’t covered under U.S. free speech laws — like the First Amendment — but have long said they support free speech and expression across their platforms, including ...

  8. Snyder v. Phelps - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snyder_v._Phelps

    U.S. Const. amend. Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous.

  9. McCutcheon v. FEC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._FEC

    McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 572 U.S. 185 (2014), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on campaign finance.The decision held that Section 441 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, which imposed a limit on contributions an individual can make over a two-year period to all national party and federal candidate committees, is unconstitutional.