First Amendment

Later filed state court proceedings warrant Younger v. Harris abstention only when the district court proceedings are at an "embryonic stage." State statute requiring in-state incorporation to obtain license to conduct interstate business violates the dormant Commerce Clause, but First Amendment is not infringed by statutes requiring a disclosure that the existing lender did not sponsor or authorize third-party ads… Read More

One heir’s suit against another, which sought to disinherit a co-heir defendant under the no contest clause in the decedent's trust, is a suit based on protected activity and thus is subject to an Anti-SLAPP motion to strike, since the defendant’s prior contest was a protected judicial proceeding. Read More

A state violated the First Amendment’s establishment clause by denying church schools subsidies provided other schools for playground improvements.  Read More

State statute violated the First Amendment by forbidding registered sex offenders from accessing websites if the site allows minors to be members, because the prohibition was not sufficiently narrowly tailored to the state’s interest in protecting minors.  Read More

The prohibition on trademarking offensive or disparaging marks—here, an Asian dance rock band called “The Slants”—violated the First Amendment, since the prohibition serves no substantial governmental interest and is not narrowly drawn.  Read More

A discrimination suit challenging a tenure decision is not subject to an Anti-SLAPP motion to strike even if the decision followed a public hearing and statements made at the hearing are used as evidence of bias.  Read More

New York statute forbidding retail sellers from charging higher-than-stated prices to customers who pay with credit cards must satisfy the First Amendment test for regulations of commercial speech.  Read More

Lawsuit over whether plaintiffs were wrongly excluded from board member positions in nonprofit religious corporations that controlled a religious organization, was not barred under the ministerial exception since plaintiffs’ claims would not interfere with a religion’s freedom to choose its own ministers.  Read More

Civil harassment injunction which barred defendant from writing defamatory letters about plaintiff did not violate defendant’s First Amendment rights, but the trial court’s order needed to clarify that defendant was allowed to conduct bona fide petitioning activity in letters to governmental officials about plaintiff.  Read More

State statutes prohibiting licensed mental health providers from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with minors do not abridge the religious freedom of either therapists or the minors in their care.  Read More

Ordinances banning mobile billboards were content-neutral and reasonably tailored to traffic needs, thus overcoming advertisers’ facial First Amendment challenge.  Read More

Policeman stated a viable claim for wrongful termination in violation of his First Amendment rights by alleging that he was demoted because the police department mistakenly thought it observed him supporting a rival candidate for mayor instead of the incumbent.  Read More

A regulation banning conduct by California state university students that “threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person including intimidation and harassment” is not unconstitutionally overbroad or vague, because the words “threatens or endangers health or safety” give context and meaning to the prohibited “intimidation and harassment.”  Read More