Articles for tag: Freedom of speeech, Palestine Action, Redefreiheit, Vereinigtes Königreich

Palestine Action, Proscription and Proportionality

In July, the UK government has decided to proscribe the organisation Palestine Action. The order means that people are criminalised not just for expressing support for terrorist acts, but for the proscribed organisation. As a result, over 500 people were reportedly arrested at a protest in London on 9 August. Whether the decision pushes anti-terrorism law too far and violates freedom of expression will be assessed by the courts at a later date. If the decision survives a legal challenge, it could pave the way for proscription to be used in relation to a broader range of groups in future.

21. August 2025

, , ,

Laboratories of Authoritarianism

In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the 1st Amendment Free Exercise Clause to grant conservative religious parents a constitutional right to remove their children from any classroom where a teacher includes LGBTQAI+ people in the curriculum. In effect, the Court has allowed public schools to discourage mutual tolerance, parents to opt out of Equal Protection, and fringe legal strategists to continue to use children’s constitutional rights as a test case for authoritarianism. In doing so, the erosion of children’s rights becomes the foundation upon which other rights are eroded.

11. Juli 2025

, , , , ,

Troops in L.A.

This past weekend, President Donald Trump issued a presidential memorandum that federalized National Guard troops and deployed those troops alongside active-duty marines in response to protests against his aggressive immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles. While framed as a response to violence, the order also addresses peaceful protest. The decision to send military forces against civilians engaged in protected First Amendment activity marks a dangerous escalation, raising serious legal and constitutional concerns.

13. Juni 2025

, , , , ,

The Dark Side of Humor

On March 3, 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) released its final judgment in Yevstifeyev and others v. Russia. The decision concerned two applications against the Russian government, claiming that the domestic authorities had failed to comply with their obligation to “respond adequately” to homophobic messages and thus violated the applicants’ right to private life under Articles 8 and 14 of the Convention. This ruling offers an excellent illustration of the Court’s flawed understanding of the role of humor and satire in the protection of free speech.

14. Mai 2025

, ,

The Death Knell for American Free Speech Tradition

In a case that has received global attention and reproach, Mahmoud Khalil, a lawful permanent resident of the United States and recent graduate of Columbia University (another target of the Trump administration’s ire), was arrested on 8 March by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in front of his apartment in New York and subsequently transferred to a detention facility in Louisiana. In this blog post, my aim is to show that the case of Mr. Khalil implicates perhaps the most sacrosanct of American constitutional rights: free speech. 

25. März 2025

, , , , ,

Judicial Paternalism and Free Speech in India

The Indian Supreme Court has recently decided two cases pertaining to the speech acts of two different individuals—a podcaster and a legislator of the Legislative Council of the State of Bihar. In both cases, the Court chose to reprimand the individuals for their ‘indecent’ and ‘unparliamentary conduct’ and also sanctioned punishments upon them, without any a priori determination of whether their speech acts, in any manner, violated the limits of the right to free speech as guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The reprimand and the sanction, I argue, emerged from the Court’s false belief that it is tasked to school the citizens on the appropriate and correct ways of using their speech rights.

4. März 2025

,

Criminalizing Knowledge

When does sharing information become an act of disloyalty to the state? Three bills advancing through Israel’s Knesset aim to answer this question decisively: any cooperation with international justice mechanisms, particularly the International Criminal Court (ICC), would constitute a betrayal of the state punishable by up to life imprisonment. This legislative package marks a dramatic shift from merely opposing international criminal jurisdiction to criminalizing the very act of documentation and information-sharing about potential human rights violations. For Israeli scholars researching international humanitarian law, the message is clear: our academic work could become a criminal offense if it finds its way to international courts.

21. Februar 2025

, , , ,

Ceci n’est pas un Ban?

On 19th January 2025, the ‘Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act’ became operative in the USA in respect of TikTok, routinely (but somehow deceptively) referred to as ‘TikTok ban’. I will not deal in detail here with the saga (which readers of this blog are already familiar with), but with the misalignment between legal form and political narrative: A vaguely formulated statute became a symbolical proxy for principled confrontation over the underlying values.

6. Februar 2025

, , , ,

Zuckerberg’s Strategy

On January 7, 2025, and in the days following, the founder and CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, made a series of statements that framed Meta's previous and future content policy with an evidently strategic intention. The change of content moderation policy, as described in three comprehensive points in his personal announcement on his own platforms, may even sound reasonable, as discussed below. However, the reasoning and the framing of these changes appear to show that Meta is up to something entirely different from just further optimizing its curation of content on its platforms.

21. Januar 2025

, , , ,

Who Gets to Define Jewish Identity in Germany? 

The German Bundestag is soon expected to vote on a resolution on “protecting Jewish life in Germany” that would tie public funding for culture and science to compliance with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. While IHRA’s potential in curbing Palestinians’ political speech has been largely studied, another set of problems should warrant additional attention: the definition’s potential to regulate Jewish political identity into a singular version: one that coincides with the state of Israel. In doing so, it gives the state regulatory power to decide on what is, in fact, a burning question within Jewish circles.

1. November 2024

, , , ,