The heading of the post comes from a 2019 Wisconsin restraining order case. The judge there ordered a woman "to cease posting any information about your parents on social media referencing indirectly or directly reference either one of them"—not just defamatory speech, or threatening speech, or otherwise constitutionally protected speech, but any information about the woman's parents. And the court added, "Court informs the respondent that all the craziness described in these petitions needs to stop totally."
That injunction, I think, is unconstitutional; there's no "craziness" exception to the First Amendment. Nonetheless, I think the reasoning described above is at the heart of quite a few decisions.
Thus, for instance, Monday's Ohio Court of Appeals decision in Kennedy v. Kennedy (Judge John Eklund, joined by Judges Eugene Lucci and Matt Lynch) deals with a trial court order that prohibited the parties from
-copy-dd1f2bf0.jpeg?w=600)
