Noting cases involving the California Bar Association, Martindale Hubbell, Esquire Publishing and The El Paso Times in which opinions about attorneys
constituted protected speech, Avvo's Motion to Dismiss cites extensive case law protecting media outlets» First Amendment rights and rebuts the allegations in the Class Action Complaint.
Not exact matches
In a statement, Broglio's office said: «Archbishop Broglio and the Archdiocese stand firm in the belief, based on legal precedent, that such a directive from the Army (about not reading the letter)
constituted a violation of his Constitutionally -
protected right of free
speech and the free exercise of religion, as well as those same rights of all military chaplains and their congregants.»
A Downing Street spokeswoman refused to comment, but a Home Office source told The Times: «Getting agreement about the thresholds for what
constitutes extremism and what needs to be
protected as free
speech is not going to be easy or straightforward.»
«While we recognize the obligation to
protect against hate
speech that
constitutes incitement to hostility, discrimination or violence, this should not be used as a pretext to clampdown on legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression that does not
constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
But in granting Avvo's motion to dismiss, U.S. District Judge Robert W. Gettleman found that Avvo's lawyer listings
constituted non-commercial
speech fully
protected by the First Amendment.
The website and the statements contained thereon do not
constitute a threat and are, therefore,
protected speech.
The court held that responses to the questionnaires are announcements
constituting speech protected by the First Amendment.
After having many of the videos translated into English, Wong and her colleagues set out to determine which ones were, in fact, illegal in Turkey; which violated YouTubeâ $ ™ s terms of service prohibiting hate
speech but allowing political
speech; and which
constituted expression that Google and YouTube would try to
protect.
Hunter refused, arguing that his blog
constituted First Amendment
protected speech and therefore, a disclaimer limiting his
speech rights was unconstitutional.