Free Speech Freedom of Speech Protests Privacy Rights Freedom of Expression First Amendment Human Rights ACLU Government Oversight Digital Rights Democracy Surveillance National Security Press Freedom Due Process Immigration Policy Immigration Protest Rights Academic Freedom Privacy Concerns First Amendment Rights Privacy Constitutional Rights Judicial Decisions Government Surveillance Free Speech Issues Censorship Law Enforcement Fourth Amendment Freedom of Assembly Gun Control Internet Freedom Authoritarianism Political Activism Activism Privacy Issues Government Accountability Free Speech Rights Lawsuit Freedom of the Press Media Control Free Expression Pro-Democracy Movements Advocacy Groups Government Actions Religious Freedom Freedom of Press Judicial System Individual Rights Public Policy Constitutional Law Civil Rights Violations Legal Challenges Emergency in India Human Rights Violations Protest Movements Restrictions Political Repression Racial Disparities Whistleblowing Racial Bias Legislation Legal Reforms Police Accountability Government Policy Bipartisan Legislation Opposition Parties Freedom of Protest Prison System Personal Liberty Racial Profiling Public Safety Free Speech Union Digital ID Cards Discrimination Public Protests Government Overreach Internet Surveillance Media Relations Rights and Freedoms Media Censorship Freedom of Conscience Welfare State Racism Legal Rights Surveillance Technology Voting Rights Opposition Rights Suppression Fourth Amendment Rights Social Justice Government Regulation Law Enforcement Oversight Sedition Advocacy Press Rights Nonprofits Religious Legislation Emergency Powers
The panel ruled his post‑9/11 remarks did not solicit imminent crime or provide operational help.
