I’ve posted to SSRN the latest version of my article forthcoming in the Baylor Law Review, Free Speech and the First Amendment’s Efficacy Inquiry. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

I’m thrilled to announce that I’m joining the faculty of the University of Minnesota, where I will be the Silha Professor of Media Ethics and Law and the Director of the Silha Center for the Study of Media Ethics and Law.

An absolutely terrible idea.

In 2022, I published a book about the importance of anonymity to free speech. I knew that anonymity was under attack globally but never imagined its collapse would be this fast.

When we look back at the death of the open and free global internet, the legislative and judicial developments of 2026 will play a starring role.

Jacob Mchangama and I have a piece in the WSJ about the dangers of regulating online speech. www.wsj.com/politics/soc...

I imagine that the New York Times won’t correct the latest error about Section 230 on its op-ed page, but it should.

📅 BOOK LAUNCH | APR 6 in DC: How can we reverse the global free speech recession? @mchangama.bsky.social and @jkosseff.bsky.social will discuss their forthcoming book about how free speech can meet modern challenges at @politicsprose.bsky.social in Washington, D.C.

In 2022, I wrote a book about the history of anonymous speech because I was worried that we eventually would lose the ability to be anonymous online. I did not predict how quickly it would happen. www.theverge.com/tech/875309/...

Will Section 230 last another 30 years?

A very special someone has a big birthday tomorrow.

A huge honor to receive the latest review of our book from one of my free speech heroes.

Our book has a cover and I love it! Coming in April 2026.

The webpage for our forthcoming book! www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/...

same

Have you been sent here from another planet to destroy me?

Countries routinely use hate speech laws to punish political dissent and criticism of public officials.

ah, I’ve missed Bluesky

It’s happening.

It doesn’t need to be this way.

The fourth edition of Cybersecurity Law will be published on Oct. 14! A new chapter on Internet of Things, along with many new sections on topics such as CIRCIA, the SEC cybersecurity regs, geofence warrants, and the impact of Van Buren on CFAA litigation.

So this is concerning, especially because last year SCOTUS denied cert in a case challenging the constitutionality of criminal defamation laws. www.foxnews.com/us/proposed-...

So this happened last night.

Pretty amazing that 60 Minutes does an entire segment about Germany prosecuting people for online posts and does not include even one voice raising free speech concerns. The segment looks like it was produced by the German government. www.cbsnews.com/news/policin...

Who knows if TikTok will remain back online or who will own it in the long run. But Friday’s Supreme Court opinion will cause enduring damage to the First Amendment.

Still amazed that SCOTUS didn’t even try to hide the censorship motivation.

You realize that you are saying this on social media?

This free speech mess was brought to you by all three branches of government. Great job, guys.

There is another important TikTok case at SCOTUS. TikTok likely will file a cert petition in Anderson v. TikTok, a Third Circuit opinion that narrowly construed Section 230. TikTok has retained Paul Clement and received an extension to file until Feb. 20.

Breyer’s latest HLR article reminds me why I am thankful for the writing styles of Kagan and Barrett.

Someone should write a book about why this is wrong.

Francisco did an excellent job but it really seems like TikTok will lose and it won’t be close.

I’ll allow

A reminder that the Jan. 10 Supreme Court argument is not the only incredibly important TikTok issue at the Court. TikTok has until Jan. 21 to file a cert petition in the Anderson case, in which the Third Circuit sharply diverged from other circuits’ interpretation of Section 230.

The international version of TikTok is unavailable in China because the Chinese government heavily censors speech. Not sure if this should be the model for US tech policy.

I will permit it if someone says that a group of fifth graders singing Wicked songs at the top of their lungs when he is trying to work is like shouting fire in a crowded theater.

Justice Robert Jackson, in a dissent. Fun fact: The majority opinion from which he dissented would be used by the Supreme Court in 1963 to overturn the convictions of 187 African American students who had peacefully protested segregation.

Our essay is in today’s WSJ print edition!

From more than 500 WSJ commenters, I have learned that there are no free speech problems when the government uses vague national security concerns to force the shutdown of a speech platform used by 170 million Americans.

The 10 y/o is having a bit too much fun reading the hundreds of furious comments on our WSJ article. She especially likes the calls to deport me. But she also wants to create a wsj.com login so she can “roast” the commenters. So I consider that a parenting win.

Lots of anger in the comments section, including a call to deport me to China. But this one really hurt.

In the Wall Street Journal, @mchangama.bsky.social and I explain why a TikTok ban would violate America’s free speech tradition. www.wsj.com/politics/pol...

Judge Davila *really* did not want to strike down the CA minor personalized social media feed law.

Indeed I have. Canada’s laws manage to be both unreasonable and ineffective.

Absolutely disagree with that. Rather than jailing people for such odious speech, use your own speech rights to prove them wrong.

I’ll take the U.S. free speech standard over the German standard any day please.

No correction published yet.

I’m on episode 6, and it is pretty clear that the Squid Game writers absolutely hate Section 230.

Now the NY Times is just trolling me.