Law Profs teaching First Amendment: I have put together a FREE, recently updated, and easy to use casebook for use in free speech classes. If you are interested in using such a casebook, send me an email or DM and I would be happy to share!

This starts tomorrow! I will be moderating a little chat about jawboning with @genevievelakier.bsky.social and Derek Bambauer. How timely :)

An amazing tool for advocating on your own campuses against the Compact (so much gratitude to @genevievelakier.bsky.social, @veenadubal.bsky.social, and @aaup.org writing this incredibly incisive letter that we can all use) 👀 👀 👀

"The Department of Education’s proposed 'compact for higher education' is unconstitutional and should be unequivocally rejected by universities" -- new from Amanda Shanor & @serenamayeri.bsky.social at @knightcolumbia.org

Worth also reading @genevievelakier.bsky.social’s Substack post on the unconstitutionality (quaint notion!) of tying federal fund access to waiving First Amendment rights… blog.dividedargument.com/p/the-uncons...

For insightful views on Trump’s Higher Ed Compact, check out: @fishkin.bsky.social at balkinization: balkin.blogspot.com/2025/10/the-... @genevievelakier.bsky.social at divided argument: blog.dividedargument.com/p/the-uncons... And @himself.bsky.social in the NYT: www.nytimes.com/2025/10/08/o...

Excellent post by @evelyndouek.bsky.social about the most important doctrinal move made by the Court in the Rubio case: to take seriously the chilling of speech as a First A injury. It should not be hard to understand why recognizing this matters so much to all of us RIGHT NOW.

Great piece @insidehighered.com by Robert Post and Tom Ginsburg about the considerable threats posed by Trump's (extortion) "compact" with 9 universities. @aaup.org www.insidehighered.com/opinion/view...

Hello! I am your friendly neighborhood First Amendment professor here to provide some background on Chiles v. Salazar, to be argued in Supreme Court this morning. At issue is whether Colorado can ban licensed therapists from inflicting the discredited practice of “conversion therapy” on minors

“The fact that so many of its provisions infringe on the protected 1st A rights of the universities…makes the Compact almost certainly unconstitutional.” Must read by @genevievelakier.bsky.social blog.dividedargument.com/p/the-uncons...

Excellent post--and in its own way remarkably hopeful about the unlikeliness of the Compact to succeed in its effort to control American higher education...

The Trump Administration’s “Compact of Excellence” for Universities is... far from excellent! Indeed, it’s unconstitutional. In this post, let me count the ways. blog.dividedargument.com/p/the-uncons...

University presidents it’s time for a united front. I mean, it’s past time. What are you going to do.

The admin’s efforts to get universities to agree to a list of demands in exchange for preferential access to federal funding isn’t just “troubling” as Ted Mitchell, prez of the @aceducation.bsky.social says in this article; it looks blatantly unconstitutional.🧵 www.wsj.com/us-news/educ...

You would think this move by Texas Tech would be blatantly unconstitutional bc it intrudes so much on academic freedom, which SCOTUS has insisted is a "special concern of the First Amendment." But you would be wrong 🧵https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/26/us/politics/texas-tech-gender.html

The week in review: @genevievelakier.bsky.social on weaponizing antidiscrimination law, @sanjukta.bsky.social on laws and markets, and Ally Coll and Justin Gravlee on NIH v. APHA. Plus, an incredible conference on Capitalism and Socialism (free, online, starting in an hour 😬).

I talked with Jeffrey Rosen and Eugene Volokh about the law of jawboning, Brendan Carr's threats against ABC, the Trump admin's threats against universities, and the deep problems created by a public sphere in which the gov pulls so many purse strings. open.spotify.com/episode/1sZo...

for years when academics warned about the problems with letting media consolidate at the hands of one of two companies people yawned, now every day there's another vivid example of why they were right

To kick off a series on @lpeblog.bsky.social exploring the perverse use of antidiscrimination law by the Trump admin, I wrote about the radical interpretation the admin has adopted of Title VI and what it means for TItle VI's past & future. lpeproject.org/blog/title-v...

Today, @genevievelakier.bsky.social explains how Title VI, perhaps the crowning achievement of the Civil Rights Movement, has become one of the most powerful forces against desegregation.

FCC Chairman Carr’s successful targeting of Jimmy Kimmel is part of a longstanding pattern of jawboning. Back in February, @knightcolumbia.org submitted a statement to the House Committee on the Judiciary outlining just a few of Carr’s acts of censorship (1/):

In this post I explain why the suspension of Kimmel’s show looks like a blatant 1A violation, as all NINE members of SCOTUS last year made clear.... but also why courts may not be able to do much about it (and yet Kimmel should still sue!) blog.dividedargument.com/p/did-brenda...

Genevieve Lakier is who everyone should be reading on the risks of government jawboning in the Jimmy Kimmel case. @genevievelakier.bsky.social

If you take what a 9-0 Court said in Vullo seriously, it seems clear to me that Kimmel has not just a plausible jawboning claim but a strong one on the basis of Carr's threats. (Always read Genevieve Lakier 👇)

"In the era of Trump, censorship... very likely will target the economic infrastructure of speech rather than speech itself. But this does not make it any less a threat to the democratic values that the First Amendment is supposed to protect." A good day to revisit @genevievelakier.bsky.social!

You know what would be really cool to have right now? A FEDERAL ANTI-SLAPP STATUTE yes A FEDERAL ANTI-SLAPP STATUTE (and quoting Kyle's post because he kindly included a Court Listener link to the Complaint)

And this is why, notwithstanding the formal protections provided by the First Amendment, the federal gov possesses extraordinary power to control public debate--power it is wielding aggressively right now.

So much that is awful here. But the justification the president provides here--that the firing doesn't violate academic freedom bc the professor MISLED students & admin about the content of her class--is one that we are likely to see again.

Harvard is reportedly nearing a “settlement” with Trump. Here’s a great podcast episode from @knightcolumbia.org with Wesleyan President Michael Roth, U Chicago First Amendment guru @genevievelakier.bsky.social, and journalist @cristianfarias.com. podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/t...

@knightcolumbia.org just published an excellent, detailed analysis of the many problems w/the settlement Columbia reached with the Trump admin. Read it and weep, anyone who cares about academic freedom and political dissent.

LISTEN to today's episode with First Amendment legal scholar @genevievelakier.bsky.social and Wesleyan President Michael Roth discussing the Trump administration’s #jawboning and extortion campaign against U.S. universities. More on the conversation below. ⬇️ podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/h...

JAWBONING. The DOJ obviously thinks the First Amendment doesn't need to apply to it. www.nytimes.com/2025/07/28/u...

We've come to expect headlines like this from directional universities and even state flagships. But this is new, and troubling.

in case you're skeptical of equating exclusion from the White House press pool with authoritarianism...

It turns out the institutional structures that protect free expression in the US are incredibly weak. This is just one example of the caving in happening all around us. These publishers should be ashamed, and uh, rethink their day jobs. It is their job not to give in to political pressure to censor.

On Monday, a judge will consider motions for summary judgment in Harvard v. HHS, challenging the admin's freezes of billions in federal grants. Here's @knightcolumbia.org's series on fed funding and the First Am, w/ posts from brilliant experts on these questions knightcolumbia.org/research/fed...

Things are really going well for your liberal democracy when the priorities of one of the most powerful private institutions in the country can be so effectively altered by govt threats and intimidation... www.thecrimson.com/article/2025...

“Not since the McCarthy era have immigrants been the focus of such intense repression for lawful political speech,” said @ramyakrishnan.bsky.social in her opening statement in today's trial. More in @joshgerstein.bsky.social's recap in @politico.com.

Good two-part post on the Balkinization blog by Chicago's @genevievelakier.bsky.social‬ about how First Amendment doctrine is and isn't equipped to check the current Administration's war on political opponents and knowledge institutions. (Linking to Part 1 of 2.) balkin.blogspot.com/2025/07/the-...

I wrote about the strong analogies btw the current moment of govt speech repression and the McCarthy Era--and the ways in which 1A law is and also IS NOT better able to safeguard free speech values this time around. First part is here balkin.blogspot.com/2025/07/the-... .... ⬇️

📌TOMORROW at 9:00am ET: Calling all members of the press to tune in to Day 1 of the AAUP v. Rubio trial, the first trial related to the Trump admin’s policy of arresting, detaining, & deporting students and faculty for their pro-Palestinian activism. Register: forms.mad.uscourts.gov/seating-sign...

As the Paramount news makes clear, the Trump admin has effectively leveraged fed $$ to control what is supposed to be the INDEPENDENT marketplace of ideas. I wrote about how this happened, why the 1A allows it and to suggest it's time for 1A scholars to begin thinking about what is to be done...

Think about how insane this is. I know we normalize every abnormal thing Trump does, & he floods the zone & numbs us, but a leading media organizing rolling over & agreeing to pay $16m to the president because he didn’t like how they edited an interview?? What country is this?

Quick First Amendment refresher: The press is supposed to check the government not write checks to the government. www.nytimes.com/2025/07/02/b...

This is what a chilling effect looks like. An individually rational decision (I’m sure the president thought he did what’s best for the univ) that adds up to massive speech repression

This is an excellent takedown of the dreadful opinion handed down last week in the AAUP case challenging the Columbia funding cuts. Read it and weep! The only thing I would add is that the standing problems with the opinion are particularly egregious given the significant 1A interests at stake 🧵

This is an excellent takedown of the dreadful opinion handed down last week in the AAUP case challenging the Columbia funding cuts. Read it and weep! The only thing I would add is that the standing problems with the opinion are particularly egregious given the significant 1A interests at stake 🧵

More relevant today than ever I’m afraid.

I am sympathetic to the difficult situation Harvard finds itself in. But I do not understand how any deal with the admin, other than the most empty one, could NOT compromise its free speech & institutional values. Surely any deal would signal that extortion works. www.nytimes.com/2025/06/20/u...

I guess we're making Geduldig great again. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...