Â鶹´«Ã½IOS

Can public officials block users on social media accounts they use for official business? In most cases the answer is no, but there are some exceptions.

Did the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles violate the First Amendment by denying an application for a specialty license plate featuring the Confederate flag?

Can the U.S. government require U.S.-based NGOs to explicitly oppose prostitution and sex trafficking as a condition of receiving federal funding for global HIV/AIDS programs?

Did the 8th Circuit err in holding that the 1985 Beef Promotion & Research Act, and regulations promulgated there under which impose assessments on beef producers and importers to fund research, education, and promotional activities carried out by special administrative bodies created by Congress for the express purpose of furthering important governmental objectives under direct supervision of Secretary of Agriculture are unconstitutional and unenforceable?

Whether the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) induces public libraries to violate the 1st Amendment, thereby exceeding Congress's power under the Spending Clause by providing that a library that is otherwise eligible for special federal assistance for Internet access in the form of discount rates for educational purposes under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. 254(h), or grants under the Library Services and Technology Act, 20 U.S.C. 9121 et seq., may not receive that assistance unless the library has in place a policy that includes the operation of a technology protection measure on Internet-connected computers that protects against access by all persons to visual depictions that are obscene or child pornography, and that protects against access by minors to visual depictions that are harmful to minors, a condition of the receipt of federal funding.

Does a 1996 law that permits attorneys receiving Legal Services Corp. funds to represent individuals in suits for welfare benefits, but prohibits them from challenging the constitutionality of existing welfare laws violate the First Amendment?

Whether a federal law requiring cable operators to "fully scramble" indecent and sexually explicit programming on adult stations violate the First Amendment.

Whether a federal law banning truthful, nonmisleading broadcast ads of private casino gaming violates commercial free-speech rights.

Whether a law requiring the National Endowment for the Arts to consider "general standards of decency" before awarding grants to artistic projects is unconstitutional.

Whether the provisions of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 that prohibit the transmission of indecent and patently offensive materials to minors over the Internet violate the First Amendment.

Whether the government may constitutionally require cable television system operators to carry local broadcast stations.

Whether the government may constitutionally (1) permit cable operators to refuse to carry indecent material on leased local access channels, (2) require cable operators that choose to carry indecent local access programming to place such programming on a separate channel and to block the channel until the subscriber requests unblocking, and (3) permit cable operators to refuse to carry indecent programming on local public, educational, and governmental channels.

Whether a public university can deny funds to a religious student group that it provides to nonreligious student groups.

Whether the government may constitutionally require cable television system operators to carry local broadcast stations.

Whether a California law banning indecent as well as obscene interstate commercial telephone messages violated the First Amendment's free speech guarantee

Whether a state sales tax scheme that taxes general interest magazines, but exempts newspapers and religious, professional, trade, and sports journals, violates the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of the press

In this landmark 1983 case, the United States Supreme Court upheld lobbying restrictions imposed on tax-exempt nonprofit corporations.

Whether a broadcast of patently offensive words dealing with sex and excretion may be regulated because of its content.

Whether a Florida statute that afforded a right to reply to personal attacks on political candidates by newspapers violated the First Amendment.

Whether the respondents lack of a contractual or tenure right to reemployment, taken alone, defeats his claim that the non-renewal of his contract violated the First Amendment and whether the college refused to renew the teaching contract based on a impermissible basisas a reprisal for the exercise of the constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech.

Whether the operation of a radio service broadcasting music, commercials and announcements on public buses violates the freedoms of speech and privacy guaranteed to citizens by the First and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution.

Whether a New York Education Law that prohibited the commercial showing of any motion picture film without a license, and authorized denial of a license on a censors conclusion that a film was "sacrilegious," violated the First Amendment. Could the New York Board of Regents ban Roberto Rossellinis The Miracle under regulations barring "sacrilegious" films?

Do the constitutional protections of freedom of expression, including those of the Ohio Constitution, extend to motion pictures?