Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Free Speech Versus Free Education: First Amendment Considerations In Limiting Student Athletes' Use Of Social Media, Mary Margaret Penrose
Free Speech Versus Free Education: First Amendment Considerations In Limiting Student Athletes' Use Of Social Media, Mary Margaret Penrose
Meg Penrose
This article considers the First Amendment implications regarding limitations placed on student athletes' use of social media. Schools have a vested interest in controlling their athletes' public expressions, whether such expressions are found in tattoos, public interviews or tweets. Like it or not, a great deal of damage can occur in "140 words or less." And, displeased student-athletes have choices. Twitter or touchdowns. Facebook from your dorm or facetime on television hitting three-pointers. While universities are generally places that encourage robust speech and debate, there are defensible, and arguably lawful, reasons why schools should limit student-athletes' use of social media. …
Free Speech Versus Free Education: First Amendment Considerations In Limiting Student Athletes' Use Of Social Media, Mary Margaret Penrose
Free Speech Versus Free Education: First Amendment Considerations In Limiting Student Athletes' Use Of Social Media, Mary Margaret Penrose
Meg Penrose
This article considers the First Amendment implications regarding limitations placed on student athletes' use of social media. Schools have a vested interest in controlling their athletes' public expressions, whether such expressions are found in tattoos, public interviews or tweets. Like it or not, a great deal of damage can occur in "140 words or less." And, displeased student-athletes have choices. Twitter or touchdowns. Facebook from your dorm or facetime on television hitting three-pointers. While universities are generally places that encourage robust speech and debate, there are defensible, and arguably lawful, reasons why schools should limit student-athletes' use of social media. …
Leaving The Dale To Be More Fair: On Cls And First Amendment Jurisprudence, Mark Strasser
Leaving The Dale To Be More Fair: On Cls And First Amendment Jurisprudence, Mark Strasser
Mark Strasser
In Christian Legal Society of the University of California, Hastings College of Law v. Martinez, the Supreme Court upheld the Hastings College of Law’s requirement that all recognized student groups have an open membership policy. The decision has been criticized for a variety of reasons, e.g., that the Court conflated the First Amendment tests for speech and association. What has not been adequately explored is the degree to which the Court has modified limited purpose public forum analysis in the university context over the past few decades, resulting in a jurisprudence that is virtually unrecognizable in light of the more …
How Public Schools Can Constitutionally Halt Cyberbullying: A Model Cyberbullying Policy That Survives First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, And Due Process Challenges, Naomi Harlin Goodno
How Public Schools Can Constitutionally Halt Cyberbullying: A Model Cyberbullying Policy That Survives First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, And Due Process Challenges, Naomi Harlin Goodno
Naomi Harlin Goodno
There have been all too many recent cases where children are taking their lives because of cyberbullying. Schools, courts, and legislatures are struggling with how to deal with such tragedies. Imagine two public school students, Joe and Jane. Joe punches Jane during class. The school is certainly within its legal rights to discipline Joe. Assume, instead, Joe punches Jane while both are walking home from school. The school cannot discipline Joe because the act took place off-campus. Now, assume instead, that Joe, while at home and using his own laptop, creates a website about Jane stating that he wished she …
When Obscenity Discriminates, Elizabeth M. Glazer
When Obscenity Discriminates, Elizabeth M. Glazer
Elizabeth M Glazer
When public indecency statutes outlaw gender nonconformity, obscenity discriminates; when movie ratings censor representations of sexual minorities, obscenity discriminates, and discriminates on the basis of their status as sexual minorities. This Article addresses obscenity doctrine’s infliction of first generation, or status discrimination against sexual minorities by conflating “sex” – and the prurient representation of sex that constitutes obscenity – and “sexual orientation.” Civil rights lawyers and scholars have turned their attentions away from “first generation” discrimination,” where groups experience discrimination on the basis of their status, and toward “second generation” discrimination, where groups experience discrimination for failing to downplay or …
When Obscenity Discriminates, Elizabeth M. Glazer
When Obscenity Discriminates, Elizabeth M. Glazer
Elizabeth M Glazer
When public indecency statutes outlaw gender nonconformity, obscenity discriminates; when movie ratings censor representations of sexual minorities, obscenity discriminates, and discriminates on the basis of their status as sexual minorities. This Article addresses obscenity doctrine’s infliction of first generation, or status discrimination against sexual minorities by conflating “sex” – and the prurient representation of sex that constitutes obscenity – and “sexual orientation.” Civil rights lawyers and scholars have turned their attentions away from “first generation” discrimination,” where groups experience discrimination on the basis of their status, and toward “second generation” discrimination, where groups experience discrimination for failing to downplay or …
The Mischief Of Cohen V. Cowles Media Co., Alan E. Garfield
The Mischief Of Cohen V. Cowles Media Co., Alan E. Garfield
Alan E Garfield
For a short, sloppily reasoned 5-4 decision that textbook editors have largely consigned to note status, Cohen v. Cowles Media Co. has had a remarkably insidious influence on First Amendment law. The problem is not so much the decision’s holding. The Supreme Court’s conclusion that newspapers could be liable for breaching a promise of anonymity to a source might actually further speech interests. The problem instead is in Cohen’s reasoning. It is the way in which the Supreme Court so cavalierly dismissed the argument that the First Amendment precluded punishing media defendants for the publication of truthful information. The Court …