Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Rediscovering Liberty Of Contract: The Unnoticed Economic Right Contained In The Freedom Of Speech, Steven C. Begakis
Rediscovering Liberty Of Contract: The Unnoticed Economic Right Contained In The Freedom Of Speech, Steven C. Begakis
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
The liberty of contract formation is a form of speech, and thus it is a right guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.This Article examines how the First Amendment secures the liberty of contract formation and analyzes how that liberty is supported by the U.S. Supreme Court’s commercial speech jurisprudence and by both originalist and traditionalist theories of Constitutional interpretation.
"The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Fear Itself": The Constitutional Infirmities With Felon Disenfranchisement And Citing Fear As The Rationale For Depriving Felons Of Their Right To Vote, Erika Stern
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Felon disenfranchisement, a mechanism by which felons and former felons are deprived of their right to vote, is a widespread practice that has been challenged on many grounds. However, felon disenfranchisement has not yet been properly challenged under the First Amendment. This Article argues that states implicate felons’ First Amendment rights through felon disenfranchisement without citing adequate or compelling rationales to justify this severe intrusion. In fact, at least one rationale, a rationale based on the fear of the way felons might vote, is itself inconsistent with First Amendment principles. Disenfranchising felons based on a fear of the way that …
Harris V. Quinn And The Contradictions Of Compelled Speech, Catherine L. Fisk, Margaux Poueymirou
Harris V. Quinn And The Contradictions Of Compelled Speech, Catherine L. Fisk, Margaux Poueymirou
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In Harris v. Quinn, the Supreme Court held that unionized homecare workers have a First Amendment right to refuse to pay their fair share of the cost of services that the union is statutorily required to provide. The Court thus transformed what had been a legislative debate about “right-to-work” laws, which about half of states have adopted, into a constitutional requirement for one narrow category of public sector employees. The problem with transforming this policy argument into a First Amendment requirement is that treating fair-share or agency-fee payments to a union as compelled speech raises First Amendment rights of …