Your Cart is Empty
Allison Stanger
The Atlantic
Excerpt: In ruling Friday on the future of the social-media app TikTok, the Supreme Court understood it was dealing with a novel issue. “We are conscious that the cases before us involve new technologies with transformative capabilities,” the justices declared in a per curiam opinion. “This challenging new context counsels caution on our part.”
When the nation’s Founders enshrined freedom of speech in the First Amendment, they couldn’t have imagined phone apps that amplify information around the world almost instantaneously—much less one controlled by a foreign power, as TikTok is, and capable of tracking the movements, relationships, and behaviors of millions of Americans in real time.
Gabe Kaminsky, Madeleine Rowley, and Maya Sulkin
The Free Press
Excerpt: On Saturday evening, federal immigration authorities arrested an anti-Israel activist who helped lead protests against the Jewish state on Columbia University’s campus after Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack. As progressive activists and free speech advocates protested the move to revoke Mahmoud Khalil’s green card over civil liberties concerns Monday, President Donald Trump warned that Khalil’s arrest would be the first “of many to come.”
Ana Ley
New York Times
Excerpt: Mahmoud Khalil, 30, emerged as a public face of students opposed to the war, leading demonstrations and granting interviews. He delivered a message that his side viewed as measured and responsible but that has been branded by some, including the Trump administration, as antisemitic.
Over the weekend, Mr. Khalil was at the center of the news again. He was arrested by federal immigration officials in a drastic escalation of President Trump’s crackdown against what he has called antisemitic campus activity. Mr. Khalil, a permanent resident of the United States, had been living in Columbia’s student housing when he was detained and then transferred to the Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center in Jena, La.
Jerry A. Coyne
Why Evolution is True
Excerpt: One of the most odious forms of censorship in modern science. or in any discipline that produces empirical results, is to simply ignore the results of or even refuse to publish a study simply because it gives results you—or a journal or a newspaper—don’t like because they go against current ideology.
Now we have another case, with two media organizations—this time including the NYT—ignoring a study on the inimical (yes, inimical) effects of DEI training on intergroup harmony. Both articles are from late last year.
