In Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a
California requirement that charities share the names of donors who
contributed more than $5,000, saying it violated the rights of association
protected under the First Amendment.
Board of Airport Commissioners of the City of Los Angeles v. Jews for
Jesus, Inc. (1987) invalidated an airport rule declaring the terminal
closed to First Amendment activities.
City of Houston v. Hill (1987) found that a Houston ordinance prohibiting
verbal abuse of police officers to a criminalization of First Amendment
protected speech.
Dombrowski v. Pfister (1965) said federal courts may step in when a state
statute substantially chills First Amendment free expression through
overbreadth
Gooding v. Wilson (1972) limited the scope of the “fighting words”
exception to the First Amendment and enhanced the development of the
overbreadth doctrine.
Lewis v. City of New Orleans (1974) overturned a conviction for cursing at
police, saying the state law was overly broad and thus violated the First
Amendment.
Packingham v. North Carolina (2017) invalidated a state law prohibiting sex
offenders from accessing social media. The court said the law barred First
Amendment rights on websites.
In Simon and Schuster v. New York State Crime Victims Board (1991), the
Supreme Court said that New York’s Son of Sam law violated the First
Amendment.
In United States v. Hansen, 599 U.S. ____ (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Helaman Hansen who had been found guilty under U.S. Code § 1324 (a)(1)(A)(iv), which forbids “encourag[ing] or induc[ing] an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact
Although the First Amendment protects the right of an individual to possess
pornography inside his home, the right does not extend to transporting
material, the Supreme Court said in United States v. Orito in 1973.
In 2010, the Supreme Court overturned a federal law that made it a crime to
create, sell or distribute images depicting animal cruelty for commercial
purposes. In United States v. Stevens, the Court said the law was overly
broad, and could encompass images of hunting and animal slaughter.