Labor/Employment
Oct. 30, 2020
Judge denies drivers a restraining order on Uber’s political speech
“Temporary restraining orders that ‘forbid speech activities’ are ‘classic examples of prior restraints,’ and are ‘the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights,’” said San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard B. Ulmer Jr.
A trial judge refused to grant Uber drivers' request for a temporary restraining order against the ride-share company, reasoning that such an injunction would infringe on Uber's right to free speech.
If granted, the order would have banned Uber from making statements supporting Proposition 22 on its app. It would have also required Uber to inform its California drivers that they can vote any way they want on the ballot measure, whic...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In