"Is the implication that this is only worth reporting about because of that case, and without the Supreme Court case this wouldn't have been reported at all? Or

"Is the implication that this is only worth reporting about because of that case, and without the Supreme Court case this wouldn't have been reported at all? Or is it that it was only looked at in the first case because of the Supreme court case? " as the sibling comment says, Eugene is a law professor specializing in first amendment law. He almost certainly is reporting on it because of that case. Would it be worth reporting otherwise, yes, but definitely, the former is accurate. One of two things happened: 1. Either Eugene discovered it himself because he saw that case or 2. Someone notified Eugene of that case. My guess is his earlier blog posts let folks know he was interested in these issues, and someone emailed him this case, which got him investigating. (I'm sure if you bug him, he'll tell you, he's a nice guy)