Would you just LOOk at all this "masculine energy"

Anyone who thinks constitutional violations ought be an "eye for an eye" endeavor is (a) shockingly craven and (b) neither a believer in our Constitution nor fit for public office.

Ari Cohn, obviously a bot

A federal judge just struck Donal Trump's complaint against the New York Times and Penguin Random House under Rule 8 as "improper and impermissible" www.courtlistener.com/docket/71354...

ATTN SCOUTS: The appellate court's ruling sets up a split with the trial court it reversed. Pls to help.

Signs you probably aren't qualified to (at a bare minimum) be representing people before the Supreme Court of the United States.

Hate to break it to you, but if your wife is divorcing you because of what ChatGPT said, it wasn't ChatGPT that doomed your marriage. Be for real. futurism.com/chatgpt-marr...

"Charlie Kirk has no amendments right now" is the type of sentence you'd expect to hear from a fourth-grader.

This is messed up, to put it extremely mildly

Demonstrably false. bsky.app/profile/aric...

ABC has spinelessly and swiftly responded to the government pressure and suspended Kimmel indefinitely. My statement on this disappointing update:

I also had some thoughts about Carr's continued use of the FCC as a partisan censorship weapon. My statement:

I had some thoughts for @joelancaster.com on Trump's latest defamation monstrosity. reason.com/2025/09/17/t...

This should not be necessary, and should go without saying. But grateful that @mayorofchicago.bsky.social issued direct, unequivocal orders for police to proactively safeguard First Amendment rights—especially when other govt elements are actively threatening them. abcnews.go.com/US/chicago-m...

🧐🧐🧐

A newspaper--the NYT in particular--bemoaning that social media companies have not...figured out how to **prevent speech from influencing people**...is perhaps one of the least self-aware things I've seen in the past week. And that is really saying something. www.nytimes.com/2025/09/16/t...

"Mocking, trivializing, or promoting violence" is protected by the First Amendment. If a university president said that "promoting racism" would not be tolerated on campus, the same people cheering this on would be apoplectic.

Same. Although that's not entirely fair. Many of these people know full well better, and are saying it anyway, either because it's politically expedient or because it's what they really desire.. Which is way worse. www.politico.com/news/2025/09...

The Supreme Court better have some pretty tough questions next time the government comes in asking to let it violate the First Amendment on "urgent national security" grounds.

The lawyers who wrote Trump's lawsuit have many reasons to question their own life decisions and professional qualifications (you can't even get 5 paragraphs in without reading something batshit crazy), but none tops this one: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

I know a certain baker who is going to be preeeeetty upset!

Truly insane post from The Federalist, which includes the recommendation that the government pressure tech companies to limit access to BlueSky because of the reaction to Kirk's death thefederalist.com/2025/09/15/w...

But they should be

Again, you show up here in your military uniform, and your service--the entirety of it--is tanrished and worthless, and you are dishonorable--expect to receive a commensurate welcome. You always have an obligation to not do the wrong thing, no matter who orders you to do it.

ICYMI: Following the vindication of WTAM's LGBTQ students' First Amendment rights, University of North Texas rescinded its drag ban after @thefireorg.bsky.social & @aclutx.bsky.social wrote the chancellor reminding him that he too is bound by the First Amendment. www.thefire.org/news/victory...

The district court's grant of summary judgment to Harvard and the AAUP against HHS mirrors what we've been arguing all along. More to come. www.thefire.org/news/fire-st...

There is precedent for this, actually. Far be it from me to approve of Mayor Daley's mob boss tactics, but @govpritzker.illinois.gov maybe you can take a page out of his book just this once: www.wbez.org/chicago/2023...

Chicagoans: buy up some Texas flags to burn in the presence of military uniforms. abc7chicago.com/post/texas-n...

I really think they're going to go down in history next to antibiotics and the earliest vaccines. It's easy to over-weigh the significance of the moment we live in now, but the people who brought us this breakthrough are miracles

Guardsmen have a choice to make: If you show up here, you'll have disgraced your uniform and tarnished your service, which you should no longer expect to be thanked for. To be sure, saying "I won't do that" isn't an easy or consequence-free choice. But it's one you'll be judged on.

1/ No government officials can memory-hole their own speech in an attempt to hide their past statements from the public. Doing it through improper copyright complaints is no less censorship than a direct government order.

What a deeply weird thing to post.

Not for nothing, but the NO FAKES Act will make this problem worse. It incentivizes using tools *exactly* like TakedownsAI for preemptive content removal.

These people are unrepentant racists but also too cowardly to use the slur they so desperately want to.

Sure sounds like Kunal Anand is admitting to filing bad-faith DMCA takedown notices here. www.404media.co/how-onlyfans...

The state of civics knowledge in this country is a national crisis. Seriously, so much of the doomer bullshit here comes from people who do not know, at a basic, mechanical, who does the work and where level, how America works.

1/ This week, House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer demanded that the Wikimedia Foundation hand over information on editorial policies & individual contributors to help the committee investigate "propaganda" on Wikipedia. These demands are offensive to 1st Amendment values

Minnesota state fair free press booth doing the heavy lifting @aricohn.com

Speech is protected, so putting a brick on a car's gas pedal is protected if it's a parade float, huh? CHECKMATE!

Well, all of our political careers are going to die

It's funny when people say this like they think I'll feel bad about being a First Amendment lawyer. Says a lot about them.

People who misuse "writ large" while trying to sound smart and sophisticated and like they Really Know What They're Talking About are deeply amusing.

TV Psychosis

If you think First Amendment protection should depend on "social value," you're gonna have a real bad time.

And now, if you'll excuse me, I am finally home from my fourth straight week of work travel and I am going to ignore social media for a bit and spend some time with the family at last

Wait till someone tells em about The Anarchist Cookbook

The guy who said "wow if you're going to put yourself out as an expert, it's incumbent to know what you're talking about," relied on a PDF summary when research would have revealed courts' narrow interpretation to avoid the exact issue I identified. Classic of the genre.

They're almost always correct, but even when you think they're wrong on the merits, it's a good thing First Amendment maximalists like @aricohn.com are there as a reliable opposition, raising the difficulty hurdle for chipping away at free speech protections, especially when the target is loathsome.

1) If I was after money, I probably wouldn't have spent 90% of my career working at nonprofits. 2) I'm not sure how talking about the First Amendment is unethical, but ok

Never have I ever advocated for kids to die