Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Freedom of Speech (5)
- United States Constitution 1st Amendment (5)
- United States Constitution (4)
- Pornography (2)
- Abrams v. United States (250 U.S. 616 (1919)) (1)
-
- Bullying (1)
- Chirstian Legal Society v. Martinez (130 S. Ct. 2971 (2010)) (1)
- Citizenship (1)
- College Athletes (1)
- Decency Standards (1)
- Equal Protection (1)
- FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (438 U.S. 726 (1978)) (1)
- Freedom of Association (1)
- Hate Speech (1)
- Jr. (1)
- Obscenity (1)
- Oliver Wnedell Holmes (1)
- Online Social Networking (1)
- Property Rights (1)
- Religious Discrimination (1)
- Right of Privacy (1)
- Schenck v. United States (249 U.S. 47 (1919)) (1)
- Strict Scrutiny Doctrine (1)
- Student Associations (1)
- Technological Innovations (1)
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (393 U.S> 503 (1969)) (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
All A Twitter: Social Networking, College Athletes, And The First Amendment, Davis Walsh
All A Twitter: Social Networking, College Athletes, And The First Amendment, Davis Walsh
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Campus Citizenship And Associational Freedom: An Aristolelian Take On The Nondiscrimination Puzzle, Chapin Cimino
Campus Citizenship And Associational Freedom: An Aristolelian Take On The Nondiscrimination Puzzle, Chapin Cimino
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Student expressive association on campus is a thorny thicket. Student affinity groups often choose to organize around a shared principle or characteristic of the groups’ members, which, by definition, makes those students different in some way from their peers. In order to preserve the group’s sense of uniqueness, these groups often then wish to control their own membership and voting policies. They feel, in essence, entitled to discriminate—a right arguably embodied by the First Amendment freedom of expressive association. When campus groups actually exercise this right, however, they run into university antidiscrimination policies, which can cost them official campus recognition. …
Technologies Of Control And The Future Of The First Amendment, Christopher S. Yoo
Technologies Of Control And The Future Of The First Amendment, Christopher S. Yoo
William & Mary Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Auto-Authentication Of The Page: Purely Written Speech And The Doctrine Of Obscenity, Ryen Rasmus
The Auto-Authentication Of The Page: Purely Written Speech And The Doctrine Of Obscenity, Ryen Rasmus
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
Government Property And Government Speech, Joseph Blocher
Government Property And Government Speech, Joseph Blocher
William & Mary Law Review
The relationship between property and speech is close, but complicated. Speakers use places and things to deliver their messages, and rely on property rights both to protect expressive acts and to serve as an independent means of expression. And yet courts and scholars have struggled to make sense of the property-speech connection. Is property merely a means of expression, or can it be expressive in and of itself? And what kind of “property” do speakers need to have—physical things, bundles of rights, or something else entirely?
In the context of government property and government speech, the ill-defined relationship between property …
Badmouthing Authority: Hostile Speech About School Officials And The Limits Of School Restrictions, Emily Gold Waldman
Badmouthing Authority: Hostile Speech About School Officials And The Limits Of School Restrictions, Emily Gold Waldman
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
No abstract provided.
The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman
The Dark Side Of The Force: The Legacy Of Justice Holmes For First Amendment Jurisprudence, Steven J. Heyman
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Modern First Amendment jurisprudence is deeply paradoxical. On one hand,
freedom of speech is said to promote fundamental values such as individual selffulfillment, democratic deliberation, and the search for truth. At the same time, however, many leading decisions protect speech that appears to undermine these values by attacking the dignity and personality of others or their status as full and equal members of the community. In this Article, I explore where this Jekyll-and-Hyde quality of First Amendment jurisprudence comes from. I argue that the American free speech tradition consists of two very different strands: a liberal humanist view that emphasizes …