Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Big Censorship In The Big House—A Quarter-Century After Turner V. Safley: Muting Movies, Music & Books Behind Bars, Clay Calvert, Kara Carnley Murrhee
Big Censorship In The Big House—A Quarter-Century After Turner V. Safley: Muting Movies, Music & Books Behind Bars, Clay Calvert, Kara Carnley Murrhee
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy
On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Turner v. Safley, this Article examines how federal courts across the country are applying the Turner standard today in cases involving the First Amendment free speech rights of inmates. Are courts too quick today to support the censorial proclivities of prison officials? Do judges too readily capitulate in deference to the concerns of those tasked with overseeing the incarcerated? Those are the key questions this Article addresses by analyzing inmate access to magazines, movies, books, and other common forms of media artifacts. This Article’s determinations stem from …
Of Burning Houses And Roasting Pigs: Why Butler V. Michigan Remains A Key Free Speech Victory More Than A Half-Century Later, Clay Calvert
Of Burning Houses And Roasting Pigs: Why Butler V. Michigan Remains A Key Free Speech Victory More Than A Half-Century Later, Clay Calvert
Federal Communications Law Journal
More than fifty years after the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its unanimous decision in Butler v. Michigan, the case remains a pivotal-if unheralded and perhaps underappreciated-victory for freedom of speech. This Article analyzes the Butler principle and demonstrates how courts repeatedly apply it across different media platforms and in a myriad of factually distinct contexts, ranging from prohibitions on the sale of sex toys to bans on beer bottles with offensive labels. The Article initially provides an in-depth look at Butler, drawing on literary scholarship, historical newspaper articles from the time of the case, and other sources. It then illustrates …
The Future Of Free Expression In A Digital Age, Jack M. Balkin
The Future Of Free Expression In A Digital Age, Jack M. Balkin
Pepperdine Law Review
In the twenty-first century, at the very moment that our economic and social lives are increasingly dominated by information technology and information flows, the judge-made doctrines of the First Amendment seem increasingly irrelevant to the key free speech battles of the future. The most important decisions affecting the future of freedom of speech will not occur in constitutional law; they will be decisions about technological design, legislative and administrative regulations, the formation of new business models, and the collective activities of end-users. Moreover, the values of freedom of expression will become subsumed within a larger set of concerns that I …
Regulating From Typewriters In An Internet Age: The Development & Regulation Of Mass Media Usage In Presidential Campaigns, Anthony J. King
Regulating From Typewriters In An Internet Age: The Development & Regulation Of Mass Media Usage In Presidential Campaigns, Anthony J. King
Anthony J. King
The American election process has become a misleading process of campaign promises and self-promotion, thus diluting its primary and most fundamental purpose. This discrepancy can be traced to three primary groups; (1) the candidates, who supplied the motive; (2) the mass media, who supplied the means; and (3) the electorate, who so far have allowed it to happen. Seeking to remedy the situation lawmakers have turned to regulations of the media in attempt to assure fairness and nurture the marketplace of ideas. These numerous attempts at fairness have been met with a mixed reception and mixed results leading to questions …
How The Movies Became Speech, Samantha Barbas
How The Movies Became Speech, Samantha Barbas
Journal Articles
In its 1915 decision in Mutual Film v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, the Supreme Court held that motion pictures were, as a medium, unprotected by freedom of speech and press because they were mere “entertainment” and “spectacles” with a “capacity for evil.” Mutual legitimated an extensive regime of film censorship that existed until the 1950s. It was not until 1952, in Burstyn v. Wilson, that the Court declared motion pictures to be, like the traditional press, an important medium for the communication of ideas protected by the First Amendment. By the middle of the next decade, film censorship in the …
When Bad Speech Does Good, Mary Anne Franks