UNL Student Government Passes SJP-Backed Israel Divestment Resolution
How Long Can America Go on Like This?
Intrusive Bankers and Government Overreach
Trump’s America First Dealmaking on AI Export Controls
Washington Post Layoffs Mark Long-Awaited Decline of Regime Media
Biology and Common Sense Triumph Over Radical Transgender Ideology
Respect the Badge. Enforce the Law but Fix the System.
In the Super Bowl of Drug Ads, Trump’s FDA Plays the Long Game...
From Open Borders to Ruinous Powderkegs
New Musical Remakes Anne Frank As a Genderqueer Hip-Hop Star
Toledo Man Indicted for Threatening to Kill Vice President JD Vance During Ohio...
Fort Lauderdale Financial Advisor Sentenced to 20 Years for $94M International Ponzi Schem...
FCC Is Reportedly Investigating The View
Illegal Immigrant Allegedly Used Stolen Identity to Vote and Collect $400K in Federal...
$26 Billion Gone: Stellantis Joins Automakers Retreating From EVs
Tipsheet

Upcoming SCOTUS Case: Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (First Amendment)

Guest post from Ken Klukowski

Getting ready for SCOTUS tomorrow.

Not much to report from the Court today. Decisions came down in two cases, both important but not particularly newsworthy. Court heard argument in employment discrimination case against Chicago. Lawyer for Chicago was Benna Ruth Solomon, who is the counsel of record for Chicago on the Chicago gun ban case McDonald v. Chicago that SCOTUS will hear next Tuesday. (I’ll be attending argument, and will report afterward.)
Advertisement


But tomorrow there will be a big case: Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project. At issue is a group advocating the use of international law and nonviolent measures to settle conflicts. But under federal law, if they communicate with a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government, such discussions can be prosecuted as a felony for giving “training,” “expert advice or assistance,” or “service” to terrorists. The question before the Court is whether that federal law, which is part of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, is too vague to be constitutional because it’s unclear how broad the law goes, and could infringe on First Amendment free speech rights.

Should be interesting. I’ll be at oral arguments for it in the morning. Also possible that some decisions in pending cases will come down tomorrow as well.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement