Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta (1)
- Appeals (1)
- Civil discovery (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Classical categories (1)
-
- Cognitive psychology (1)
- Collateral order doctrine (1)
- Compelled disclosures (1)
- Concept theory (1)
- Conceptual categories (1)
- Confidential (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Doctrine (1)
- Federal appealability (1)
- Federal constitution law (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Freedom of association (1)
- Privacy (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Appealing Compelled Disclosures In Discovery That Threaten First Amendment Rights, Richard L. Heppner Jr.
Appealing Compelled Disclosures In Discovery That Threaten First Amendment Rights, Richard L. Heppner Jr.
Law Faculty Publications
Last year, the Supreme Court held in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta that a California anti-fraud policy compelling charities to disclose the identities of their major donors violated the First Amendment. That holding stems from the 1958 case NAACP v. Alabama where the Court held that a discovery order compelling the NAACP to disclose the names of its members violated the First Amendment right of free association because of the members’ justifiable fear of retaliation.
In the over sixty years since NAACP v. Alabama, the Court has only decided a handful of cases about how compelled disclosures of …
Conceptualizing Appealability: Resisting The Supreme Court's Categorical Imperative, Richard L. Heppner Jr.
Conceptualizing Appealability: Resisting The Supreme Court's Categorical Imperative, Richard L. Heppner Jr.
Law Faculty Publications
This paper draws on insights from cognitive psychology to understand how courts conceive of categories of orders. Cognitive psychologists have shown that people understand the world using not only "classical categories" based on logical definitions, but also "conceptual categories" based on fuzzier, intuitive concepts of similarity and typicality. This paper approaches appealability as a two-step process-first, categorizing the order and, second, applying the appropriate doctrine. Previous interventions have focused on whether different doctrines use rules or standards at the second step. This paper focuses on the initial categorization step.
This paper makes two contributions to the study of federal appealability. …