Business owners have a First Amendment right to speak on their businesses’ social media accounts about matters of public concern without fear of government retaliation.
The long tradition of having juries determine just compensation cannot be casually tossed aside by concluding that a trial judge deciding whether the government’s actions had “damaged” property is also deciding whether the owner’s residue property has been damaged.
If the challenged executive orders in the four underlying cases were allowed to stand, the precedent would jeopardize the ability of amici, and any other litigant, to seek redress in the courts from unlawful government infringement on individual rights. Such an outcome cannot be abided.
Whether a party can pay a fine will, in most cases, turn on the aggregate fine imposed instead of the per violation amount. So, naturally, an ability to pay analysis must consider the aggregate fine amount along with the per violation amount... The danger is especially apparent in property cases where owners who can’t afford to make repairs are treated as if every single day is a new violation and fined accordingly. While $100 per day for chipping paint might be affordable on day one (the first violation), few people could afford it on day 100.
After nearly a century of federal decisions routinely upholding what seem like unfettered delegations, it is imperative that this Court take a case to clarify that the nondelegation doctrine is alive and enforceable in the 21st century.
The Supreme Court should grant the petition to address how listeners’ rights can inform the often confounding distinction between content-neutral and content-based expression.
The First Amendment does not stop at the schoolhouse gate. In our increasingly polarized world, teachers, no less than students, deserve the protection of the First Amendment.