Chrysler Sales Corp. v. Spencer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that \[a]n instructor's choice of teaching methods does not rise to the level of protected expression\
• holding a policy that prohibited speech that was “intentional or unintentional, regardless of political value” was void for vagueness
• affirming that campus discriminatory harassment speech policy is, on its face, unconstitutionally overbroad and vague, after district court found that students had standing to sue despite lack of enforcement against them
• affirming that campus discriminatory harassment speech policy is, on its face, unconstitutionally overbroad and vague, after district court found that students had standing to sue despite lack of enforcement against them
• facts of the case demonstrated the necessity of subjective reference in identifying prohibited speech under the policy
• collecting cases on matters of public concern

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).