Law Commons^™

Disinformation And The Defamation Renaissance: A Misleading Promise Of “Truth”, Lili Levi

University of Richmond Law Review

Today, defamation litigation is experiencing a renaissance, with progressives and conservatives, public officials and celebrities, corporations and high school students all heading to the courthouse to use libel lawsuits as a social and political fix. Many of these suits reflect a powerful new rhetoric—reframing the goal of defamation law as fighting disinformation. Appeals to the need to combat falsity in public discourse have fueled efforts to reverse the Supreme Court’s press–protective constitutional limits on defamation law under the New York Times v. Sullivan framework. The anti–disinformation frame could tip the scales and generate a majority on the Court to dismantle …

Rural Bashing, Kaceylee Klein, Lisa R. Pruitt

University of Richmond Law Review

Anti-rural sentiment is expressed in the United States in three major threads. The first is a narrative about the political structure of our representative democracy—an assertion that rural people are over-represented thanks to the structural features of the U.S. Senate and the Electoral College. Because rural residents are less than a fifth of the U.S. population, complaints about this situation are often framed as “minority rule.”

The second thread is related to the first: rural people and their communities get more than their fair share from federal government coffers. The argument, often expressed in terms of “subsidies,” is that rural …

Solving Slapp Slop, Nicole J. Ligon

University of Richmond Law Review

In a substantial minority of states, wealthy and powerful individuals can, without much consequence, bring defamation lawsuits against the press and concerned citizens to silence and intimidate them. These lawsuits, known as “strategic lawsuits against public participation” (“SLAPP”s), are brought not to compensate a wrongfully injured person, but rather to discourage the defendants from exercising their First Amendment rights. In other words, when well resourced individuals feel disrespected by public criticism, they sometimes sue the media or concerned citizens, forcing these speakers to defend themselves in exorbitantly expensive defamation actions. In states without anti-SLAPP statutes—statutes aimed at protecting speakers from …

Replacing Tinker, Noah C. Chauvin

University of Richmond Law Review

In this Article, I wish to question whether reaffirming the animating spirit of Tinker is the best way to protect student speech rights. In allowing schools to punish student speech that school officials reasonably believe could be substantially disruptive, Tinker founds students’ free expression rights on unstable ground. This is true for two reasons. First, the Tinker standard allows school officials to regulate student speech based on their own perceptions of what its impacts will be. While these perceptions must be reasonable, courts have shown extraordinary deference to educators’ claims that student speech could be substantially disruptive. Second, the substantial …

Religious Exemptions As Rational Social Policy, Justin W. Aimonetti, M. Christian Talley

University of Richmond Law Review

In its 1963 decision Sherbert v. Verner, the Supreme Court interpreted the Free Exercise Clause to permit religious exemptions from general laws that incidentally burdened religious practice. Sherbert, in theory, provided stringent protections for religious freedom. But those protections came at a price. Religious adherents could secure exemptions even if they had no evidence the laws they challenged unfairly targeted their religious conduct. And they could thereby undermine the policy objectives those laws sought to achieve. Because of such policy concerns, the Court progressively restricted the availability of religious exemptions. In its 1990 decision Employment Division v. Smith …

Curating Campus Speakers, Henry L. Chambers Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

Curation—the picking and choosing of materials for pedagogical reasons—regularly occurs on college campuses both inside and outside of the classroom. This brief essay explains that curation in two contexts. Part I discusses the curation of courses inside the classroom. Part II discusses the curation of campus speakers outside the classroom. Though applied to different topics, the process of curation is similar in both contexts. Considering both forms of curation can help illuminate and resolve some of the most important issues underlying the debate regarding controversial campus speakers.

The First Amendment And The Great College Yearbook Reckoning, Maryann Grover

University of Richmond Law Review

I advance my argument in three parts. In Part I, I discuss the law as it currently applies to student publications. I begin by briefly addressing the law as it applies to student publications in high schools as a way of demonstrating the lack of clarity in the law as it applies to student publications on college campuses. I then discuss the current state of speech regulation for student publications, including yearbooks, on college campuses. In Part II, I discuss each of the categories of unprotected speech as they are currently interpreted by the Supreme Court, and I demonstrate how …

Closed Meetings Under Foia Turn Fifty: The Old, The New, And What To Do, Tyler C. Southall

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Exercise And Comer: Robust Entrenchment Or Simply More Of A Muddle?, Mark Strasser

University of Richmond Law Review

Several states are barred by their own constitutions from spending public monies in support of sectarian institutions. The United States Supreme Court has manifested great ambivalence about the constitutionality of such limitations. Sometimes, the Court has impliedly endorsed them as a reasonable measure to assure that Establishment Clause guarantees are respected. At other times, the Court has suggested that such limitations are constitutionally disfavored, although the Court has not yet held that such amendments are per se unconstitutional. The Court’s most recent decision addressing state constitutional spending limitations, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer, adds another layer of …

Race, Speech, And Sports, Matthew J. Parlow

University of Richmond Law Review

Race, sports, and free speech rights intersected in a very controversial and public way during the 2016 and 2017 National Football League (“NFL”) seasons. On August 26, 2016, Colin Kaepernick spurred a national debate when he refused to stand during the playing of the national anthem before the NFL preseason game between the Green Bay Packers and the San Francisco 49ers, Kaepernick’s team at the time.

Reconsidering Selective Conscientious Objection, Andrew J. Haile

University of Richmond Law Review

In 1971, in the midst of the Vietnam War, the United States Supreme Court decided that to qualify as a conscientious objector (“CO”) one must oppose all war, and not just a particular war. The Court’s decision in Gillette v. United States turned on its interpretation of section 6(j) of the Military Selective Service Act. Section 6(j) provided, in relevant part, that no person shall “be subject to combatant training and service in the armed forces of the United States who, by reason of religious training and belief, is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form.” According to …

Is It Bad Law To Believe A Politician? Campaign Speech And Discriminatory Intent, Shawn E. Fields

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips

University of Richmond Law Review

Using the WDBJ case as an analytical springboard, this article examines the tumultuous state of the FCC's indecency enforcement regime more than three years after the Supreme Court's June 2012 opinion in Fox Television Stations. Part I of this article briefly explores the missed First Amendment opportunities in Fox Television Stations, as well as some possible reasons why the Supreme Court chose to avoid the free-speech questions in that case." Part II addresses the FCC's decision in September 2012 to target only egregious instances of broadcast indecency and, in the process, to jettison hundreds of thousands of complaints that had …

The Conforming Effect: First Amendment Implications Of Surveillance, Beyond Chilling Speech, Margot E. Kaminski, Shane Witnov

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Advancing An Adaptive Standard Of Strict Scrutiny For Content-Based Commercial Speech Regulation, Nat Stern, Mark Joseph Stern

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Employee Speech, Categorical Balancing And § 1983: A Critique Of Garcetti V. Ceballos, Sheldon H. Nahmod

University of Richmond Law Review

I propose to discuss Garcetti's First Amendment reasoning as well as the implications of the § 1983' setting in which Garcetti and other public employee free speech cases typically arise. After briefly setting out the Court's opinion and the three dissenting opinions, I begin by addressing the pros and cons of Garcetti, and in the course of so doing, I discuss the prior Pickering-Connick landscape that Garcetti so significantly altered. I consider the deeper First Amendment implications of Garcetti, including itsuse of categorical balancing to create an absolute immunity fromFirst Amendment liability for employer discipline based on job-required public employee …

Federal Campaign Finance Reform Based On Virginia Election Law, Rhodes B. Ritenour

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Human Rights In China And The Rule Of Law, Xu Wenli

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Playing Games With The First Amendment: Are Video Games Speech And May Minors' Access To Graphically Violent Video Games Be Restricted?, Gregory K. Laughlin

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reporting On Terrorism: Choosing Our Words Carefully, Jeffrey A. Dvorkin

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jury Trials And First Amendment Values In "Cyber World", John E. Nowak

University of Richmond Law Review

In the past half-century, I suspect, enough trees to constitute a small forest have been turned into paper simply for discussion of free speech and fair trial issues. I doubt that there is little new to say about how legislatures or courts should be dealing with the subject at the moment. The Supreme Court has been able to work out a series of positions that are at least "good enough for govermnent work" concerning subjects such as attorney speech regulations, closure of trials, courthouse picketing, and protective orders related to the discovery process.

Protect The Press: A First Amendment Standard For Safeguarding Aggressive Newsgathering, Erwin Chemerinsky

University of Richmond Law Review

Few occu.pations or professions rank lower than reporters in public esteem. In July 1999, Justice Stephen Breyer participated as a panelist at the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference and was challenged by Associated Press reporter Linda Deutsch about the absence of cameras in the Supreme Court. Justice Breyer explained that the Court did not want to risk its relatively high level of public esteem by placing itself on television. Justice Breyer noted the lack of respect for the media and said that the Court did not want to see its esteem ratings lowered to that of the press.

University Of Richmond Law Review

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

University Of Richmond Law Review

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword, L. Katherine Murray

University of Richmond Law Review

The University ofRichmond Law Review is pleased to present the seventh annual Allen ChairSymposium issue. Through the generous support of the friends and family of George E. Allen, the annual symposium series provides a forum for discussion of legal issues of national and international significance. This issue ofthe Law Review is the literary complement to the symposium presentations.

Privacy And Celebrity: An Essay On The Nationalization Of Intimacy, Robert F. Nagel

University of Richmond Law Review

I start from the rather obvious proposition that in recent years the American public has placed a high value on the right of privacy. This general commitment to privacy was what kept Robert Bork, despite his qualifications, off the Supreme Court, and more recently it was what kept William Clinton, despite his behavior, in the White House. Bork's nomination was a threat to the constitutional right to use contraceptives and to choose abortion, while the impeachment charges against Clinton were a threat to the moral distinction between public political life and private sexual behavior. The power that the idea of …

Ride-Alongs, Paparazzi, And Other Media Threats To Privacy, Robert M. O'Neil

University of Richmond Law Review

When the Supreme Court first addressed the status of "ride- alongs" in late May of this year, the role of the news media could have been treated in any of several ways. The law enforcement officers, who were sued for invasion of privacy because they invited reporters to accompany them while serving an arrest warrant in a private home, offered several extenuations. The presence of journalists, they argued, would provide direct information to the general public about important news events. Moreover, reporters who took part in the arrest could, in a sense, keep the police honest, or at least make …

Qualified Intimacy, Celebrity, And The Case For A Newsgathering Privilege, Rodney A. Smolla

University of Richmond Law Review

In this symposium issue Robert Nagel, Diane Zimmerman, Robert O'Neil, and Erwin Chemerinsky explore the intersection of privacy and freedom of the press. In his fascinating inquiry into privacy and celebrity in modern American life, Robert Nagel demonstrates the connection between the American public's strong commitment to privacy and its simultaneous passion for robust protection of freedom of speech. Among his most important insights is the exposure of "pseudo-intimacy" as a principal currency of contemporary celebrity status. Diane Zimmerman, Robert O'Neil, and Erwin Chemerinsky all investigate the legal principles that ought to surround aggressive and surreptitious newsgathering techniques, each in …

I Spy: The Newsgatherer Under Cover, Diane Leenheer Zimmerman

University of Richmond Law Review

Hysteria about the press, like the flu, breaks out periodically, and when it does, few of us are better off for having lived through the experience. We are currently on what I sincerely hope will prove to be the receding edge of the latest epidemic ofpublic outrage about the press, and, as usual, the frenzied state has not brought out the best in either the media or its critics.

What Passes For Policy And Proof In First Amendment Litigation?, Rodney A. Smolla

University of Richmond Law Review

In this Allen Chair Symposium issue of the University of Richmond Law Review, three outstanding scholars have written provocative pieces on the First Amendment. Professor John Nowak engages in an exercise of constitutional futurism, "'remembering the future" to propose a number of relatively radical alterations of First Amendment doctrine to achieve what he argues should be the appropriate balance between freedom of speech and fair trials in "cyber world." Professor Paul Carrington, arguing that a communitarian right of citizens to self-government is the principal that ought to animate our politics and law, has launched a broadside indictment against contemporary First …