REGAN v. TAXATION WITH REPRESENTATION OF WASHINGTON

Did the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles violate the First Amendment by denying an application for a specialty license plate featuring the Confederate flag?

Can the U.S. government require U.S.-based NGOs to explicitly oppose prostitution and sex trafficking as a condition of receiving federal funding for global HIV/AIDS programs?

Did the 8th Circuit err in holding that the 1985 Beef Promotion & Research Act, and regulations promulgated there under which impose assessments on beef producers and importers to fund research, education, and promotional activities carried out by special administrative bodies created by Congress for the express purpose of furthering important governmental objectives under direct supervision of Secretary of Agriculture are unconstitutional and unenforceable?

Whether the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) induces public libraries to violate the First Amendment.

Does a 1996 law that permits attorneys receiving Legal Services Corp. funds to represent individuals in suits for welfare benefits, but prohibits them from challenging the constitutionality of existing welfare laws violate the First Amendment?

Whether a law requiring the National Endowment for the Arts to consider "general standards of decency" before awarding grants to artistic projects is unconstitutional.

Whether a public university can deny funds to a religious student group that it provides to nonreligious student groups.

Whether a state sales tax scheme that taxes general interest magazines, but exempts newspapers and religious, professional, trade, and sports journals, violates the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of the press

Whether Section 399 of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, as amended by the Public Broadcasting Amendments Act of 1981, which forbids any "non-commercial educational broadcasting station which receives a grant from the Corporation" to "engage in editorializing," violate the First Amendment.

Whether the respondents lack of a contractual or tenure right to reemployment, taken alone, defeats his claim that the non-renewal of his contract violated the First Amendment and whether the college refused to renew the teaching contract based on a impermissible basisas a reprisal for the exercise of the constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech.