The Supreme Court has recently issued rulings in three cases involving speech-based arrests, demonstrating increased scrutiny of such incidents. In a span of four months, the Court reversed three lower court decisions that had previously granted immunity to government officials accused of arresting individuals for their speech.
The cases are Gonzalez v. Trevino, decided on June 20, 2024; Murphy v. Schmitt, summarily reversed on October 7, 2024; and Villarreal v. Alaniz, summarily reversed on October 15, 2024. These rulings allow the cases to proceed, giving the plaintiffs an opportunity to pursue legal action against the government officials responsible for their arrests. Despite the diverse factual backgrounds of these cases, the Court's consistent approach suggests a heightened focus on protecting First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court's recent decisions may have significant implications for First Amendment jurisprudence and future cases involving speech-related arrests.
Join us for a conversation about these three cases and their possible ramifications.
Featuring:

Anya Bidwell, Attorney, Institute for Justice