Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
- File Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Brief For Professor Kent Greenfield As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Respondents, State Of Washington Vs. Arlene's Flowers And Ingersoll Vs. Arlene's Flowers, Kent Greenfield
Kent Greenfield
This amicus curiae brief addresses a fundamental state-law premise of Appellants’ constitutional claims that has gone largely unexplored in the prior briefing: whether Arlene’s Flowers, a Washington for-profit corporation, may obtain an exemption from generally applicable laws based on the religious beliefs of a shareholder, Mrs. Stutzman. Citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores and Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Appellants assert that “Arlene’s free-exercise rights are synonymous with Mrs. Stutzman’s.” Those two cases, however, had nothing to do with Washington corporate law and took no stance on the authority of …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Corporate Law Professors In Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Harold Kent Greenfield, Daniel A. Rubens
Brief Of Amici Curiae Corporate Law Professors In Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Harold Kent Greenfield, Daniel A. Rubens
Kent Greenfield
Professor Greenfield was the principal author of an amicus brief on behalf of 33 corporate law professors in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, argued in December 2017. The brief argues that shareholders’ religious and political beliefs should not be projected onto a corporation for purposes of First Amendment accommodation.
Marriage Equality Decision Was Not Just An Intellectual Exercise, Kent Greenfield
Marriage Equality Decision Was Not Just An Intellectual Exercise, Kent Greenfield
Kent Greenfield
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court's Subterfuge, Kent Greenfield
Hobby Lobby, Unconstitutional Conditions, And Corporate Law Mistakes, Kent Greenfield
Hobby Lobby, Unconstitutional Conditions, And Corporate Law Mistakes, Kent Greenfield
Kent Greenfield
No abstract provided.
Hobby Lobby And The Return Of ‘The Negro Travelers’ Green Book’, Kent Greenfield
Hobby Lobby And The Return Of ‘The Negro Travelers’ Green Book’, Kent Greenfield
Kent Greenfield
No abstract provided.
Should Corporations Have First Amendment Rights?, Kent Greenfield, Daniel Greenwood, Erik Jaffe
Should Corporations Have First Amendment Rights?, Kent Greenfield, Daniel Greenwood, Erik Jaffe
Kent Greenfield
As Professor Winkler correctly stated, current doctrine emphasizes the rights of listeners rather than the identity of corporate speakers. My argument is, in effect, that this emphasis misses the key point. But I will not deal with listeners directly. I am simply going to assume, rather than argue, that if corporate advertising were ineffective in influencing voters or legislators, normal market processes would eliminate it. I'm going to take it for granted that when corporations speak, it makes a difference in the actual results.
In Closing: Fighting Might With Rights, Kent Greenfield
In Closing: Fighting Might With Rights, Kent Greenfield
Kent Greenfield
No abstract provided.
Imposing Inequality On Law Schools, Kent Greenfield
Imposing Inequality On Law Schools, Kent Greenfield
Kent Greenfield
No abstract provided.