Does freedom of speech shield menacing threats? Or does the law have the right to step in when verbal threats instill fear and potential harm? We found ourselves in a labyrinth of these questions in our latest episode, guided by the landmark Supreme Court decision on Counterman versus Colorado. We unwind the intricate layers of defining a threat, especially in this digital age, where threats can be disguised behind the veil of anonymity. We weigh the subjective intent of the speaker against the objective perspective of a reasonable person and question which should hold more weight in legally certifying a threat.
This week, Eric discusses the guiding principles and trends of traffic stops through reviewing the cases United States v. Rodriguez, United States v. Goodwill,...
In this segment, Attorney Daigle continues the discussion on technology by reviewing the 9th Circuit case, United States v. Yang. This case provides some...
Attorney Daigle reviews the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Thompson v. Clark and how it will impact the process of arrest and following...
