Threatening texts targeting minorities after election were vile − but they might not be illegal
Following the election, a surge of hateful texts targeting minorities prompted FBI and state investigations, raising questions about the balance between free speech and potential criminality.
The anonymously sent messages, which may have numbered up to 500,000, varied in their specific language but had similarly menacing themes. Some referred to recipients as “selected for slavery” and ordered them to a plantation to pick cotton. Others said they’d be picked up for deportation or sent to a reeducation camp.
The threats lacked details on timing, location and the like. Some addressed recipients by name, while others contained no greeting or personal identifier. They seemed to be targeting Black people, immigrants and LGBTQ people but may have been dispatched indiscriminately to a wide swath of Americans.
Information technology experts have expressed confidence that the perpetrators will be identified. Yet it’s not clear to me as a professor of constitutional and criminal law that they can be prosecuted. The First Amendment generally protects free speech, even when it’s heinous.
“If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable,” the justices wrote in Texas v. Johnson, a 1989 case that affirmed flag burning is protected expression.
Snyder v. Phelps, a 2010 case involving anti-LGBTQ protesters who carried hateful signs at the funerals of fallen soldiers, strengthened that precedent.
Advertisement
“Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and – as it did here – inflict great pain,” the justices wrote. Nonetheless, they concluded, “We cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker. As a Nation we have chosen a different course – to protect even hurtful speech.”
Limits to free speech
The Supreme Court has been cautious in recognizing exceptions to the freedom of speech because of its importance to democracy and individual autonomy. Under special circumstances, however, some types of speech can be illegal.
In the 2023 case Counterman v. Colorado, the Supreme Court held that for speech to cross over the true threat line, the speaker must both express an intent to commit violence and recklessly disregard “a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”
An example of a true threat under the Counterman case would be for a scorned lover to barrage their ex with messages promising to kill or maim them.
This standard is so new that it has not been tested thoroughly in the lower courts, making predictions risky at best. In my analysis, however, a message mass distributed to thousands of recipients indicating that they had been “selected” to be a slave might not meet the Counterman standard.
Additionally, “slave” is a legal status that hasn’t existed for over 150 years, so the threat to force someone into enslaved labor likely lacks both the peril of physical harm and the plausibility of harmful action. The anonymity of the senders may add to this implausibility.
Advertisement
Courts may also find that the communications didn’t create a “significant” risk that a “reasonable” recipient would feel threatened. An anonymous mass message may be interpreted as spam, or trolling.
Accordingly, the messages probably would not rise to the level of “true threat” exceptions to First Amendment protections.
Yost was likely referring to a 2011 Ohio statute that criminalizes telecommunications that are “threatening, intimidating, menacing, coercive, or obscene with the intent to abuse, threaten, or harass the recipient.”
The intersection of telephone harassment and the First Amendment is less clear, in my analysis. Laws vary by state, but illegal harassment and stalking typically involves physical conduct, which is not protected by the First Amendment – for example, repeated unwanted visits to someone’s home or workplace. Continually following someone in a manner intended to cause fear – or which recklessly causes fear or emotional distress – would be another example.
Could a text or email be characterized as conduct rather than speech? That is unsettled law. And where the law is unclear, novel legal strategies can set a new precedent.
If a court were to decide that the act of sending the November messages was “pure conduct,” rather than protected speech, then anti-harassment laws might be used to prosecute the senders.
Private action
Criminal law aside, people are not powerless against vile communications.
Telecommunications companies are free to block messages, both before they are received and in response to customer requests. After the wave of hateful texts in November, many did just that by closing accounts identified as sources of those messages.
Advertisement
If a blocked sender continues to send similar communications to a target, the elements of harassment would be met. A court could determine that to be expressive conduct or simply speech not protected by the First Amendment.
The U.S. draws the boundary widely around free speech because it enables wide, controversial discussions of politics, law and society. In this case, the senders ran up to the line of protected speech but quite possibility didn’t cross it.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels,” the author H.L. Mencken once said. “For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
Currently, getting a yearly COVID-19 vaccine is recommended for everyone ages 6 months and older, regardless of their health risk.
In the video announcing the plan to remove the vaccine from the CDC’s recommended immunization schedule for healthy children and healthy pregnant women, Kennedy spoke alongside National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary. The trio cited a lack of evidence to support vaccinating healthy children. They did not explain the reason for the change to the vaccine schedule for pregnant people, who have previously been considered at high-risk for severe COVID-19.
Similarly, in the FDA announcement made a week prior, Makary and the agency’s head of vaccines, Vinay Prasad, said that public health trends now support limiting vaccines to people at high risk of serious illness instead of a universal COVID-19 vaccination strategy.
Was this a controversial decision or a clear consensus?
Many public health experts and professional health care associations have raised concerns about Kennedy’s latest announcement, saying it contradicts studies showing that COVID-19 vaccination benefits pregnant people and children. The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, considered the premier professional organization for that medical specialty, reinforced the importance of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, especially to protect infants after birth. Likewise, the American Academy of Pediatrics pointed to the data on hospitalizations of children with COVID-19 during the 2024-to-2025 respiratory virus season as evidence for the importance of vaccination.
Kennedy’s announcement on children and pregnant women comes roughly a month ahead of a planned meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a panel of vaccine experts that offers guidance to the CDC on vaccine policy. The meeting was set to review guidance for the 2025-to-2026 COVID-19 vaccines. It’s not typical for the CDC to alter its recommendations without input from the committee.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has removed COVID-19 vaccines from the vaccine schedule for healthy children and pregnant people.
FDA officials Makary and Prasad also strayed from past established vaccine regulatory processes in announcing the FDA’s new stance on recommendations for healthy people under age 65. Usually, the FDA broadly approves a vaccine based on whether it is safe and effective, and decisions on who should be eligible to receive it are left to the CDC, which bases its decision on the advisory committee’s research-based guidance.
The advisory committee was expected to recommend a risk-based approach for the COVID-19 vaccine, but it was also expected to recommend allowing low-risk people to get annual COVID-19 vaccines if they want to. The CDC’s and FDA’s new policies on the vaccine will likely make it difficult for healthy people to get the vaccine.
Will low-risk people be able to get a COVID-19 shot?
Not automatically. Kennedy’s announcement does not broadly address healthy adults, but under the new FDA framework, healthy adults who wish to receive the fall COVID-19 vaccine will likely face obstacles. Health care providers can administer vaccines “off-label”, but insurance coverage is widely based on FDA recommendations. The new, narrower FDA approval will likely reduce both access to COVID-19 vaccines for the general public and insurance coverage for COVID-19 vaccines.
Under the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance providers are required to fully cover the cost of any vaccine endorsed by the CDC. Kennedy’s announcement will likely limit insurance coverage for COVID-19 vaccination.
Overall, the move to focus on individual risks and benefits may overlook broader public health benefits. Communities with higher vaccination rates have fewer opportunities to spread the virus.
This is an updated version of an article originally published on May 22, 2025.Libby Richards, Professor of Nursing, Purdue University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The All-New 2026 Nissan LEAF Is Here — Sleek, Smart, and Ready to Lead
Nissan has officially lifted the curtain on the all-new 2026 LEAF, and it’s not just an update—it’s a total reinvention. The third-generation LEAF blends sleek, aerodynamic styling with SUV-like proportions, signaling a bold departure from the hatchback form that defined the nameplate for over a decade. This refreshed design marks a new chapter for one of the world’s most accessible and best-selling electric vehicles.
With nearly 700,000 global sales under its belt, the LEAF has long been a pioneer in the mass-market EV space. The 2026 model takes that foundation and builds upon it in every direction—design, technology, comfort, and capability. Whether you’re a loyal EV enthusiast or making the switch from a gas-powered car, Nissan’s newest electric offering is designed to meet you where you are and elevate your driving experience.
The all-new LEAF sports clean, sculpted body lines and a wide stance that echoes modern crossover aesthetics. Inside, the cabin is minimal yet inviting, focused on comfort, spaciousness, and wellbeing. A dimming panoramic roof with heat shielding adds a premium touch, while ambient lighting in 64 available colors helps set the perfect mood for any drive.
Performance Meets Practicality
Among the most impressive upgrades is a liquid-cooled lithium-ion battery offering up to 75 kWh of usable capacity—meaning more range, more freedom, and more confidence. Faster charging speeds and the inclusion of the North American Charging Standard (NACS) port with Plug & Charge capability further simplify EV ownership.
Nissan’s all-new 3-in-1 powertrain—a compact, integrated system combining motor, inverter, and reducer—delivers both efficiency and power in a sleek package. It’s an engineering advancement that supports the LEAF’s mission of providing reliable, affordable electric mobility for all.
Tech-Savvy and Feature-Rich
This isn’t just a car—it’s a rolling tech hub. The 2026 LEAF offers dual 14.3-inch displays, wireless Apple CarPlay® and Android Auto™, and Google built-in features like Google Maps. Drivers will enjoy innovative tools like the Invisible Hood View, Front Wide View, and the 3D Intelligent Around View® Monitor—making tight parking and complex driving environments far easier to navigate.
Audiophiles take note: the available Bose® Personal® Plus audio system ensures that your soundtrack is every bit as premium as your ride.
Advertisement
Built to Impress, Ready for the Road
With details like flush door handles, holographic 3D tail lamps, and available 19-inch wheels, the 2026 LEAF is clearly designed to turn heads. But its mission is practical at heart: making electric driving seamless for everyday users. From its improved range to thoughtful in-cabin tech, Nissan is aiming squarely at the mainstream with this launch.
Assembly for the U.S. and Canadian markets will take place at Nissan’s Tochigi plant in Japan, where the LEAF will be built alongside the Ariya SUV.
The 2026 Nissan LEAF arrives at U.S. dealerships this fall, with availability in other global markets to follow.
Want more 2026 Nissan LEAF details or a feature breakdown?
Welcome to the Consumer Corner section of STM Daily News, your ultimate destination for savvy shopping and informed decision-making! Dive into a treasure trove of insights and reviews covering everything from the hottest toys that spark joy in your little ones to the latest electronic gadgets that simplify your life. Explore our comprehensive guides on stylish home furnishings, discover smart tips for buying a home or enhancing your living space with creative improvement ideas, and get the lowdown on the best cars through our detailed auto reviews. Whether you’re making a major purchase or simply seeking inspiration, the Consumer Corner is here to empower you every step of the way—unlock the keys to becoming a smarter consumer today!
The once red-hot U.S. residential solar market is showing signs of cooling off—but don’t count it out just yet. A combination of rising interest rates, regulatory changes, and supply chain challenges have led to a notable dip in installations across the country. But while the short-term trend suggests a slowdown, industry experts remain optimistic about the long-term potential of rooftop solar.
📉 The Numbers Don’t Lie: Installations Are Down
According to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and Wood Mackenzie, residential solar installations dropped by 13% year-over-year in Q1 2025, with 1,106 megawatts (MW) installed nationwide. That’s also a 4% decline from the previous quarter. This marks a continuation of the trend that began in 2024, which saw the residential sector contract in 22 states—including a five-year low in California [^1].
Analysts at BloombergNEF predict that total U.S. solar capacity will fall by 7% between 2025 and 2027, with a projected 1% annual decline through 2035 under current policy scenarios [^2].
🧾 What’s Behind the Drop?
1. Higher Interest Rates
The Federal Reserve’s continued efforts to tame inflation have made financing solar systems more expensive for homeowners. The result? Fewer consumers are willing to commit to the upfront investment, even with long-term savings in play [^3].
2. Policy Shifts in Key States
California, long considered the leader in solar adoption, rolled back its Net Energy Metering (NEM) 2.0 program in favor of NEM 3.0, which significantly reduces the value of solar exports back to the grid. Installations in the state fell sharply as a result [^1].
On the federal side, proposed cuts to the 30% Investment Tax Credit (ITC)—a major driver of residential adoption—have caused uncertainty in the market. According to Reuters, solar stocks plummeted following changes in a Senate tax bill that threatened to shrink or eliminate these credits [^4].
Advertisement
3. Tariffs and Supply Constraints
Tariffs on Chinese and other foreign-made solar panels have led to price increases and reduced availability. Simultaneously, battery storage components are experiencing shortages, further delaying installations and complicating project timelines [^5].
🌤 The Long-Term Picture: A Resilient Future
Despite the headwinds, many in the industry see this as a short-term correction rather than a lasting decline. SEIA projects a return to 9% annual residential growth from 2025 to 2030, particularly if financing conditions improve and federal incentives remain intact [^1].
Additionally, solar panel prices remain historically low, hovering around $2.50–$2.60 per watt installed. That affordability, coupled with increasing demand for home electrification and EV charging solutions, makes rooftop solar an attractive long-term investment [^1].
In a recent industry survey, 78% of solar installers said they expect to sell as much or more in 2025 than they did in 2024 [^3]. And while the market is down in states like California, others—including Texas, Florida, and Arizona—are continuing to grow.
✅ Final Takeaway
Yes, residential solar is currently in a downturn. But it’s more of a recalibration than a collapse. Regulatory turbulence and financial pressures are squeezing the market, but the fundamentals—affordability, environmental benefits, and technological advancement—remain strong.
The future of residential solar will depend heavily on stable policy support, affordable financing, and continued innovation. If those stars align, the industry could see another boom in the latter half of the decade.
Advertisement
📚 Sources
[^1]: SEIA/Wood Mackenzie. U.S. Solar Market Insight Q1 2025.
STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here:
Cookie Policy
