Free Speech
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues
What's at stake
Learn about Free Speech
Learn about Free Speech
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues
Free Speech
Status: Ongoing
The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida’s order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students’ constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The ACLU and its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
What's at stake
Learn about Free Speech
Learn about Free Speech
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy policy.
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2023
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the ACLU of Northern California, and the ACLU of 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.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jan 2021
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.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
All Cases
116 Free Speech Cases
New Jersey Supreme Court
Nov 2023
Usachenok v. State of New Jersey
The New Jersey Department of Treasury maintains a policy that requires employers investigating workplace discrimination to “request” confidentiality from all witnesses with respect to any information related to the investigation. This case involves whether a confidentiality policy of this kind violates the free speech rights under the New Jersey Constitution of state employees who are witnesses, and whether those rights are broader than the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment free speech right. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and Women’s Rights Project, along with the ACLU of New Jersey, filed an amicus brief in the New Jersey Supreme Court, urging that court to revive a government employee’s speech claim challenging the confidentiality policy and to interpret the New Jersey Constitution’s speech protection more broadly than federal constitutional law.
Status: Ongoing
View case
New Jersey Supreme Court
Free Speech
Women's Rights
Usachenok v. State of New Jersey
The New Jersey Department of Treasury maintains a policy that requires employers investigating workplace discrimination to “request” confidentiality from all witnesses with respect to any information related to the investigation. This case involves whether a confidentiality policy of this kind violates the free speech rights under the New Jersey Constitution of state employees who are witnesses, and whether those rights are broader than the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment free speech right. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and Women’s Rights Project, along with the ACLU of New Jersey, filed an amicus brief in the New Jersey Supreme Court, urging that court to revive a government employee’s speech claim challenging the confidentiality policy and to interpret the New Jersey Constitution’s speech protection more broadly than federal constitutional law.
Nov 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
Maine Supreme Court
Nov 2023
State v. Labbe
This free-speech case concerns a prosecution for “stalking” based on evidence of a defendant’s speech alone, without any requirement of subjective intent. Freedom of speech is a bedrock protection of both the Maine Constitution and the United States Constitution. This protection requires, at minimum, that a criminal defendant cannot be prosecuted for stalking carried out via speech alone unless the state proves a subjective-intent element beyond a reasonable doubt. This protection ensures that states do not prosecute and punish people for their protected speech. In October 2023, the ACLU and the ACLU of Maine filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, asking the court to vacate a defendant’s stalking conviction that was based on his speech alone, without any evidence as to subjective intent.
View case
Maine Supreme Court
Free Speech
State v. Labbe
This free-speech case concerns a prosecution for “stalking” based on evidence of a defendant’s speech alone, without any requirement of subjective intent. Freedom of speech is a bedrock protection of both the Maine Constitution and the United States Constitution. This protection requires, at minimum, that a criminal defendant cannot be prosecuted for stalking carried out via speech alone unless the state proves a subjective-intent element beyond a reasonable doubt. This protection ensures that states do not prosecute and punish people for their protected speech. In October 2023, the ACLU and the ACLU of Maine filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, asking the court to vacate a defendant’s stalking conviction that was based on his speech alone, without any evidence as to subjective intent.
Nov 2023
View case
Ohio
Oct 2023
Cooley v. Foreman AKA Afroman
After a musician used footage of officers searching his home in music videos criticizing that search and the officers more broadly, they sued him for damages and asked the court to order him to stop speaking about them. The ACLU of Ohio and the ACLU filed an amicus brief in support of the musician’s motion to dismiss the suit, arguing that the lawsuit sought to silence criticism in violation of the First Amendment.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Ohio
Free Speech
Cooley v. Foreman AKA Afroman
After a musician used footage of officers searching his home in music videos criticizing that search and the officers more broadly, they sued him for damages and asked the court to order him to stop speaking about them. The ACLU of Ohio and the ACLU filed an amicus brief in support of the musician’s motion to dismiss the suit, arguing that the lawsuit sought to silence criticism in violation of the First Amendment.
Oct 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
Oct 2023
United States v. Trump (Amicus Brief)
The ACLU & ACLU-DC submitted an amicus brief in United States v. Trump arguing that a gag order restricting court participants’ speech must be precisely defined and narrowly tailored to prohibit imminent threats against individuals or conduct that would interfere with the impartial administration of justice.
View case
Free Speech
United States v. Trump (Amicus Brief)
The ACLU & ACLU-DC submitted an amicus brief in United States v. Trump arguing that a gag order restricting court participants’ speech must be precisely defined and narrowly tailored to prohibit imminent threats against individuals or conduct that would interfere with the impartial administration of justice.
Oct 2023
View case