US EditionPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Tabak, 109 F.4th 627 (D.C. Cir. 2024) - Harvard Law Review
Summary by harvardlawreview.org
This story is only covered by news sources that have yet to be evaluated by the independent media monitoring agencies we use to assess the quality and reliability of news outlets on our platform. Learn more here.1 Articles
1 Articles
All
Left
Center
Right
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Tabak, 109 F.4th 627 (D.C. Cir. 2024) - Harvard Law Review
How to regulate speech on social media platforms has been the subject of vigorous debate and recent Supreme Court opinions. In particular, government agencies communicating with the public via digital platforms must balance the need to moderate comments with users’ First Amendment rights. Recently, in People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. Tabak, the D.C. Circuit held that keyword filters used by the National Institutes of Health …
Coverage Details
Total News Sources1
Leaning Left0Leaning Right0Center0Last UpdatedBias DistributionNo sources with tracked biases.
Bias Distribution
- There is no tracked Bias information for the sources covering this story.
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
Ownership
To view ownership data please Upgrade to Vantage
