Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment; reporter’s privilege; prior restraint; balancing test; censorship; source; journalist; journalism; press; confidential; subpoena; news; media; freedom of the press; fourth estate; newspaper; newsgathering; chilling; media; the Pentagon Papers; Washington Post; New York Times; Branzburg v. Hayes; shield law (1)
- Google; Charlottesville; Political speech; Political expression; Political discourse; Political activity; Political affiliation; Political opinion; Ideological advocacy; Marketplace of ideas; Free speech; Private employee; Private employer; First Amendment; Employment law; Labor law; Labor relations; National Labor Relations Act; Discrimination; Right; Twitter; Social media; Employer; State statute; Federal statute; Congress; Commerce Clause; Interstate commerce power; State action; Firing; Termination; Retaliation; Regulation; Expansion; At will or at-will; Mutuality of obligation; Protection; Protected trait; California; Virginia; South Carolina; Louisiana; West Virginia; New York; Censorship; Business interest; Freedom of association; Public policy; Self-expression; Democracy; Attribution; Ideology; Hate speech; Takings clause; Neo-Nazi; White supremacy; Technology; Unpopular speech (1)
- Interactive computer service; Communications Decency Act; terrorism; Anti-Terrorism Act; incitement; liability shield; internet service provider; First Amendment; Brandenburg v. Ohio; social media; Facebook; Google; Twitter; ISIS; terrorist propaganda; home grown terrorist; terrorist attacks (1)
- Mass incarceration; first amendment; prisoner rights (1)
- National security; law enforcement; immigration; immigrant; informants; terrorism; civil liberties; criminal procedure; intelligence; First Amendment; Federal Bureau of Investigation; FBI; Muslim; Islam; religious beliefs; coercive; coercion; coerced (1)
-
- Pickering; Garcetti; academic freedom; workplace efficiency; balancing; free speech; state employees; public employees; public employment; First Amendment; college professors; teachers; expression; circuit courts; circuits; protections (1)
- Reed v. town of gilbert; private speech regulation; fcc; ftc; robocalls; telemarketing; first amendment; constitutional law; tcpa (1)
- Search Engine; Right To Be Forgotten; Right To Deindex; Right Of Publicity; Right Of Privacy; Google Spain; Privacy; Google; Google Spain V. AEPD; Private Information; First Amendment; Free Speech; Court Of Justice Of The European Union; CJEU; Publicity; Search Results; European Union; Haelan Laboratories (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Telemarketing, Technology, And The Regulation Of Private Speech: First Amendment Lessons From The Fcc’S Tcpa Rules, Justin (Gus) Hurwitz
Telemarketing, Technology, And The Regulation Of Private Speech: First Amendment Lessons From The Fcc’S Tcpa Rules, Justin (Gus) Hurwitz
Brooklyn Law Review
This article considers the viability of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) in light of recent Supreme Court First Amendment precedent and technological and regulatory developments. Robocalls—phone calls made using autodialers or prerecorded messages without the consent of the call recipient—have become one of the primary consumer protection issues facing regulators. With more than 2.4 billion of these calls placed each month, consumer concern about them dominate complaints received by both the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission. Simultaneously, as cellphones have become a ubiquitous means by which individuals engage with one another and have become the public square, …
Google, Charlottesville, And The Need To Protect Private Employees’ Political Speech, Chloe M. Gordils
Google, Charlottesville, And The Need To Protect Private Employees’ Political Speech, Chloe M. Gordils
Brooklyn Law Review
At a time when the freedom of speech is increasingly under attack, the question becomes: what protections are available to employees of private companies who wish to engage in political expression while off the clock? Although public employees are in many ways protected by the First Amendment from government intrusion into their political speech, private employees in many states are left largely unprotected. This note examines the current statutory protections offered to protect private employees from being fired or retaliated against based on their political opinions, and argues that the inconsistency and unpredictability of state laws call for a uniform …
Prisoner-To-Public Communication, Demetria D. Frank
Prisoner-To-Public Communication, Demetria D. Frank
Brooklyn Law Review
The pervasive problem of over-incarceration in the United States is in part due to lack of correctional facility accountability to the public, and public lack of access to the prisoner experience. In light of the incessant persistence of over-incarceration and “hands off approach” taken by courts in prison administration, this article proposes an unqualified and unfettered prisoner-to-public communication right that would provide prison accountability to the public.
A Nation Of Informants: Reining In Post-9/11 Coercion Of Intelligence Informants, Diala Shamas
A Nation Of Informants: Reining In Post-9/11 Coercion Of Intelligence Informants, Diala Shamas
Brooklyn Law Review
This article challenges the adequacy of the existing legal and regulatory framework governing informant recruitment and coercion practices to protect fundamental rights, informed by the Muslim-American experience. It looks at the growing law enforcement practice of recruiting informants among Muslim-American communities for intelligence gathering purposes. Although the coercion of law-abiding individuals to provide information to federal law enforcement agencies for intelligence gathering purposes implicates significant rights, it is left unregulated. Existing, albeit limited, restraints on the government agents’ ability to coerce individuals to provide information either assume a criminal context, or are driven by historical concerns over FBI corruption. As …
Search Query: Can America Accept A Right To Be Forgotten As A Publicity Right?, James J. Lavelle
Search Query: Can America Accept A Right To Be Forgotten As A Publicity Right?, James J. Lavelle
Brooklyn Law Review
Search engines have profoundly changed the relationship between privacy and free speech by making personal information widely and cheaply available to a global audience. This has raised many concerns both over how online companies handle the information they collect and how regular citizens use online services to invade other people’s privacy. One way Europe has addressed this change is by providing European Union citizens with a right to petition search engines to deindex links from search results—a so-called “right to be forgotten.” If the information contained in a search result is “inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant,” the search engine …
When The Fourth Estate’S Well Runs Dry, Megan L. Shaw
When The Fourth Estate’S Well Runs Dry, Megan L. Shaw
Brooklyn Law Review
The press is under fire. Members of the press often face subpoenas or similar court orders, compelling the disclosure of a source’s identity. By issuing media subpoenas, the government has effectively censored the press—the exact type of censorship that the Supreme Court held presumptively unconstitutional over eight decades ago in Near v. Minnesota. Yet the least protected—and most complicated—aspect of the newsgathering process is a reporter’s relationship with her source. For decades, journalists have tried to assert defenses to government compulsions on First Amendment grounds as well as by invoking a “reporter’s privilege,” a testimonial privilege similar to that of …
Section 230’S Liability Shield In The Age Of Online Terrorist, Jaime M. Freilich
Section 230’S Liability Shield In The Age Of Online Terrorist, Jaime M. Freilich
Brooklyn Law Review
In recent years, “home grown” terrorists—individuals inspired to violence after watching terrorist videos online—have been responsible for devastating attacks in the United States and across Europe. Such terrorist propaganda falls outside the realm of the First Amendment’s protection because it has been proven to indoctrinate attackers, thus inciting imminent lawless action. Seizing on this, victims’ families have brought suits alleging that social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook, and Google, provided material support to terrorists in violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA). The Communications Decency Act (CDA), however, has served as an impenetrable shield against these claims, protecting social media companies …
Pickering, Garcetti, & Academic Freedom, Mark Strasser
Pickering, Garcetti, & Academic Freedom, Mark Strasser
Brooklyn Law Review
While the U. S. Supreme Court long ago recognized that individuals do not lose their free speech rights simply by virtue of being state employees, the contours of their First Amendment protections have been evolving over the past several decades. The proper way to apply these protections in the academic context is confusing, especially after Garcetti v. Ceballos in which the Court suggested that First Amendment protections do not attach insofar as individuals are speaking as employees rather than as citizens. The circuit courts have adopted a dizzying set of rules to determine when First Amendment protections are triggered in …