Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Conspiracy Origin Of The First Amendment, Steven R. Morrison
The Conspiracy Origin Of The First Amendment, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
Scholars and jurists have misunderstood the import of three seminal 1919 First Amendment cases—Schenck v. United States, Frohwerk v. United States, and Abrams v. United States—as primarily free speech cases. They are better understood as free assembly cases. This is important for two reasons. First, individuals’ speech has the intended First Amendment effect only when speakers combine into groups. Second, the 1919 cases were the beginning of substantive First Amendment law, and so have resulted in a First Amendment jurisprudence that favors individual rights over group rights. This is a constitutional and normative mistake. Combined with the first reason, the …
When Is Lying Illegal? When Should It Be? A Critical Analysis Of The Federal False Statements Act, Steven R. Morrison
When Is Lying Illegal? When Should It Be? A Critical Analysis Of The Federal False Statements Act, Steven R. Morrison
Steven R Morrison
This article examines the federal False Statements Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), from the standpoints of judicial interpretation, the law’s history, legislative history and congressional intent, public policy, and criminal law theory. It concludes that the dominant judicial interpretations do not accord with congressional intent to create a limited and targeted law. The statute as interpreted is extraordinarily broad such that it should be—but has not been and probably won’t be—declared unconstitutionally vague. Whether the law is unconstitutional or not, as interpreted it does not support wise public policy nor does it accord with dominant theories of criminal law. This …