top of page


Murthy v. Missouri: This case was argued the same day as the NRA v. Vullo matter. It may provide a benchmark for permissible “persuasion” – or may be disposed of – on procedural grounds. As reported by the Cato Institute, “The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the Murthy v. Missouri case, which looks at the issue of when government communications with social media companies become illegal attempts to informally censor the expressive rights of social media platforms and their users.”


See this case summary, as reported by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).


Gonzales v. Trevino: This case, argued on March 20, promotes calls to revisit the pleading bar for retaliatory arrest – and potentially other retaliation claims, like the NRA’s, redressing weaponized state power. The ACLU writes, “This case is about what a plaintiff must demonstrate to sustain allegations that police arrested them in retaliation for First Amendment–protected expression. While retaliatory arrest plaintiffs generally must show that police lacked probable cause to arrest them, the petitioner in this case correctly argues that a recognized exception to that rule, for cases where police typically exercise discretion not to arrest people, must be robust to protect the free speech of government critics.”


Read an ACLU case summary here.

bottom of page