Law Commons^™

Let’S Go To The Beach: Gender Segregation As A Tool To Accommodate Religious Minorities, Sarah Gibbons

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Protecting Public Employee Trial Testimony, Joseph Deloney

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In a number of jurisdictions around the United States, police officers and other public employees that regularly testify as part of their ordinary job duties can be placed in compromising positions. Because these types of employees regularly testify as part of their ordinary job duties, such testimony is considered “employee speech” and therefore unprotected by the First Amendment. Consequently, governmental employers can take adverse employment actions against an employee based on his or her truthful trial testimony without violating the employee’s First Amendment rights. Drawing from the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Lane v. Franks and other circuit court cases, …

Because I Said So: An Examination Of Parental Naming Rights, Ashley N. Moscarello

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Naming a child is often one of the most exciting parts of having a baby. Some parents, of course, choose to be more creative and unique, which leads to some very interesting names like Toilet Queen, Acne Fountain, Crimson Tide Redd, Messiah, Candy Stohr, and Violence. Although some of these names are quite absurd, should the government be able to tell parents that they have crossed the line?

When parents agree about the name they want to give their child, should the state or courts be able to intervene in that decision if the state has problems with the name? …

A Quantum Congress, Jorge R. Roig

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This article tries to address the problem of a corrupt and broken electoral system that has been captured by special interests through big money spending in political campaigns, while at the same time preserving the spirit of the Free Speech Clause of our Constitution. In doing so, this article first reviews and summarizes the different alternatives proposed as potential fixes for the campaign finance problem. It then explains why none of the proposed alternatives can accomplish the dual goals set out above. Finally, the article briefly sketches a proposal for a fundamental reworking of our representative democracy by substituting legislative …

Installations Of Jewish Law In Public Urban Space: An American Eruv Controversy, Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This article analyzes the ongoing controversy over the installation of an eruv in Westhampton Beach. The author first provides an analytical description of the case with reference to other recent eruv controversies. Similar to arguments advanced in earlier eruv controversies, lawyers in the Westhampton case have taken recourse to the First Amendment, with proponents of the eruv relying on the free exercise clause, and opponents relying on the establishment clause. The article then proceeds to discuss the implications of this controversy for the larger issues of religion in the public sphere, as one of the critical issues emerging in all …

Roundtable Discussion: Opposition To Islamic And Jewish Religious Practices In Contemporary America: Overlap And Divergences, The Anti-Shari'a Movement In America, Wajahat Ali, Lee Ann Bambach, Samuel Freedman

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Need To Criminalize Revenge Porn: How A Law Protecting Victims Can Avoid Running Afoul Of The First Amendment, Adrienne N. Kitchen

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Revenge porn occurs when someone posts sexually explicit images of their former paramour on the web, often with contact information for the victim’s work and home. There are thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of victims. Victims lose or quit their jobs; they are harassed by strangers; some change their name or alter their appearance. Some victims resort to suicide; others are stalked, assaulted, or killed. Civil suits fail to remove the images or deter perpetrators. Current criminal laws are insufficient in several common instances. These shortcomings mean there is a need to criminalize revenge porn.

Revenge porn is obscene and …

The "Moral Hazards" Of Title Vii's Religious Accomodation Doctrine, Stephen Gee

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Freedom of religion in the workplace has recently become a hot topic with regards to whether U.S. or state laws (mainly contraceptive care and treatment of same-sex, married employees’ spouses) must accommodate certain employer’s religious beliefs or else violate the employer’s constitutional right. However, before this recent employer-centric topic came to light, the main focus was on employees and to what extent employers must accommodate an employee’s religion via Title VII. Most, if not all, academic literature has argued an employer’s duty to accommodate employee’s religion is too weak under Title VII and should thus be increased to the significant …

Banning The Hijab In Prisons: Violations Of Incarcerated Muslim Women's Right To Free Exercise Of Religion, Ali Ammoura

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Muslim American women who wear the hijab, or Islamic headscarf, face religious discrimination in nearly every aspect of their public life. They even face it during arrest or incarceration. Law enforcement officials often force Muslim women to remove their hijab while in custody, which both degrades and humiliates them in the process. But prison policies that prohibit incarcerated Muslim women from wearing the hijab violate their right to free exercise of religion. Penal institutions should not prevent incarcerated Muslim women from wearing a hijab without compelling reasons, especially when such policies often arise out of religious discrimination. Courts must …

Beyond The Schoolhouse Gate: Should Schools Have The Authority To Punish Online Student Speech?, Brittany L. Kaspar

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This note analyzes the current circuit split over whether schools should have the authority to punish students for speech made on the Internet. Part I discusses the First Amendment generally and the four Supreme Court cases that have refined its application with respect to on-campus student speech. Part II presents the ensuing circuit split over the constitutionality of disciplining students for online, off-campus speech. Specifically, this section will explain both of the existing perspectives and why neither of the two is ideal. Part III attempts to devise a solution to the current divide by advocating a compromise position. In particular, …

Court Reform And Breathing Space Under The Establishment Clause, Mark C. Rahdert

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Flast v. Cohen held that federal taxpayers have standing to challenge government spending for religion. While Frothingham v. Mellon generally prohibits taxpayer standing in federal courts, the Court reasoned that the Establishment Clause specifically prohibits taxation in any amount to fund unconstitutional religious spending. For several decades Flast has been settled law that supplied jurisdiction in many leading establishment cases. But Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. and Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn signal that Flast may soon be overruled. This jurisdictional ferment raises two questions: Why this sudden shift? And what does it signify for the …

Toward A Meaning-Full Establishment Clause Neutrality, Bruce Ledewitz

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Some form of government neutrality toward religion, in contrast to a more pro-religion stance or a turn toward nonjusticiability, is the only interpretation of the Establishment Clause that can potentially lead to a national consensus concerning the proper role of religion in American public life. But to achieve that goal, neutrality theory must acknowledge and engage the need for the expressions of deep meaning on public occasions and in the public square generally. Current neutrality doctrine promotes a silent and empty public square. This article proposes an interpretation of neutrality that would allow a symbol-rich, meaning-full public square without violating …

Electronic Privacy And Employee Speech, Pauline T. Kim

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The boundary between work and private life is blurring as a result of changes in the organization of work and advances in technology. Current privacy law is ill-equipped to address these changes and as a result, employees' privacy in their electronic communications is only weakly protected from employer scrutiny. At the same time, the law increasingly protects certain socially valued forms of employee speech. In particular, collective speech, speech that enforces workplace regulations and speech that deters or reports employer wrong-doing are explicitly protected by law from employer reprisals. These two developments—weak protection of employee privacy and increased protection for …

Higher Law Secularism: Religious Symbols, Contested Secularisms, And The Limits Of The Establishment Clause, Zachary R. Calo

Chicago-Kent Law Review

There are two dominant traditions of understanding the secular, both with long genealogical resonance in western thought: Christian secularity and secularism. The former links the secular to a theological narrative, while the latter defines the secular as standing over and against religion. Constitutional debate has commonly framed the issue of religious symbols as demanding resolution in favor of one of these traditions. Rather than offering a way to overcome the divide and the culture war it generates, the Court's jurisprudence has instead concretized the binary. Only by cultivating a new understanding of the secular in law might there emerge an …

The Future Of The Establishment Clause In Context: Neutrality, Religion, Or Avoidance?, Nicholas P. Cafardi

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Future Of The Establishment Clause In Context: A Response To Ledewitz, Christopher C. Lund

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Look At The Establishment Clause Through The Prism Of Religious Perspectives: Religious Majorities, Religious Minorities, And Nonbelievers, Samuel J. Levine

Chicago-Kent Law Review

As a number of commentators have observed, the Supreme Court's record in adjudicating the free exercise claims of religious minorities—in particular, unfamiliar and unpopular religious minorities—is vulnerable to the critique that the Court's rhetoric and, at times, the Court's holdings demonstrate an inability or unwillingness to look beyond majoritarian religious perspectives. Building on this scholarship, this article analyzes the Court's adjudication of Establishment Clause cases in the context of different religious perspectives, including those of religious minorities, religious minorities, and nonbelievers.

In exploring these questions, this article traces the Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence through several decades, examining a number of …

The Constitutional Politics Of The Establishment Clause, Richard Albert

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In these reflections presented at a Symposium hosted by Duquesne University School of Law on "The Future of the Establishment Clause in Context: Neutrality, Religion, or Avoidance?" I examine the constitutional politics driving the interpretation of the Establishment Clause. I suggest that the Supreme Court's recent case law on taxpayer standing may signal a return to the founding design of the Establishment Clause. At the founding, the Establishment Clause constrained the actions of only the national government, disabled only Congress from establishing a religion, and vigorously protected the sovereignty of states. Each of these three signposts—national interdiction, congressional disability, and …

Dueling Values: The Clash Of Cyber Suicide Speech And The First Amendment, Thea E. Potanos

Chicago-Kent Law Review

On March 15, 2011, William Melchert-Dinkel, a Minnesota nurse, was convicted of two counts of assisted suicide, based solely on things he said in emails and online chat rooms. This note examines whether cyber speech encouraging suicide, such as Melchert-Dinkel's, should be protected by the First Amendment. States have compelling interests in preserving life, preventing suicide, and protecting vulnerable persons from abuse, and the majority of them have assisted suicide statutes that could be applied to cyber-suicide speech. However, because cyber- suicide speech does not fit neatly into recognized categories of "low-value" or unprotected speech, punishment may be foreclosed by …

Public Corruption Concerns And Counter-Majoritarian Democracy Definition In Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Daaron Kimmel

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In determining the shape of the free speech rights and anti-corruption concerns that courts must balance in campaign finance cases, judges are influenced by their own underlying understandings of what an ideal democracy should look like. For judges to decide whether the government is appropriately regulating the political process, the rules that allow all citizens to interact with and shape their democracy, judges must first decide what that democracy ought to look like. This affords judges a great deal of discretion in campaign finance cases. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a particularly bold judicial attempt to reshape the …

Twittering Away The Right Of Publicity: Personality Rights And Celebrity Impersonation On Social Networking Websites, Andrew M. Jung

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Within the past couple of years, social networking websites have become an immensely popular destination for people from all walks of life. Websites like Facebook and Twitter now count tens of millions of worldwide users, including world leaders and a number of celebrities. Eventually, users realized that social networking websites lent themselves to the quick and easy impersonation of celebrities through the creation of fake social networking accounts, often as a form of parody. One subject of such impersonation was professional baseball manager Tony La Russa, who took the then-unprecedented step of suing his impersonators and Twitter over the incident. …

The Power Of The Parental Trump Card: How And Why Frazier V. Winn Got It Right, Jocelyn Floyd

Chicago-Kent Law Review

When two fundamental rights are in conflict, such that the protection of one requires the infringement of the other, courts must weigh those rights against each other to determine which is ultimately greater. In Frazier v. Winn, the Eleventh Circuit dealt with precisely such an issue: specifically, the rights of parents pitted against those of their children. This note explores the history of both parental rights and student's rights in school to show why the court appropriately affirmed that children's right to free speech is only as expansive as their parents allow, justified by the parents' fundamental right to …

Freedom From Compulsion, Tess Slattery

Chicago-Kent Law Review

A recent Eleventh Circuit case, Frazier ex rel. Frazier v. Winn, upheld as facially constitutional a Florida statute that requires a student to obtain parental permission before abstaining from participation in the Pledge of Allegiance. This note argues that the court reached the wrong conclusion because it failed to properly weigh the students' right to free speech against the parents' right to control the upbringing of their children. This note argues that Justice Breyer's framework for balancing conflicting rights should be adopted for use in this context. By applying Justice Breyer's balancing test, the Florida statute should be found …

Free Speech & Tainted Justice: Restoring The Public's Confidence In The Judiciary In The Wake Of Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White, Gregory W. Jones

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The United States Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White was the first shot fired in an ongoing battle over judicial campaign ethics. The White decision invalidated a Minnesota Canon of Judicial Conduct prohibiting judicial candidates from announcing their views on disputed legal or political topics. Subsequent to White, numerous states have faced challenges to their judicial canons of conduct by groups advocating for an increased breadth of permissible speech in judicial campaigns. While White and its progeny have safeguarded the first amendment rights of judicial candidates, significant concerns have been raised regarding how best to …

Separating Church And State: Transfers Of Government Land As Cures For Establishment Clause Violations, Paul Forster

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The note examines one of the issues currently before the Supreme Court in Salazar v. Buono, the case concerning a Latin cross war memorial in the Mojave desert. The issue is whether the government may, by transferring land to private parties, cure Establishment Clause violations caused by permanent displays that contain religious imagery. The article surveys the Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence as it applies to permanent displays, discussing the sometimes-used and sometimes-ignored Lemon-endorsement standard and the potential shift to a coercion standard. It concludes by arguing that even under the Lemon-endorsement standard, courts should often allow the …

The Speech-Enhancing Effect Of Internet Regulation, Emily Buss

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In this Article, the author suggests that certain speech-reducing regulations will, in fact, be speech-enhancing for children. This is because children are vulnerable to far greater censorship at the hands of their parents than at the hands of Internet regulators. Regulations that inspire parents to relax their grip on their children's access to information are likely to produce significant net speech gains for children. Viewed this way, regulations designed to protect children can be conceived as pitting the speech interests of adults against the speech interests of children. The Article suggests a number of reasons we might value the children's …

When Well-Being Trumps Liberty: Political Theory, Jurisprudence, And Children's Rights, William Galston

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Compared to most adults, children are dependent and vulnerable and therefore require special protection. Efforts to safeguard their well-being often collide with one or more of the liberty guarantees of the First Amendment. Professor Etzioni fears that current jurisprudence has tipped the balance too far towards individual liberty, making it difficult to extend children the legal protection they need. Drawing on a theoretical account of constitutionalism as well as existing case law, the author argues that mainstream jurisprudence is up to the task of balancing the well-being of children against the liberty of adults. The Supreme Court's recent decision in …

On Protecting Children From Speech, Amitai Etzioni

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Are children entitled to the same First Amendment rights as adults? This Article explores the constitutionality of limiting children's access to objectionable materials assuming that both free speech rights and the protection of children are two core values that, like all other social values, must be balanced. When used to assess specific court cases and public policies, the balancing principle is a helpful guide in determining whether voluntary or incentives-based programs are sufficient to remedy the problems at hand or whether government regulation of free speech is necessary. The Article analyzes five court cases involving Internet filters in libraries, the …

The Liberal Theory Of Freedom Of Expression For Children, Colin M. Macleod

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article develops a liberal theory of freedom of expression which is sensitive to the interests of children as distinct, vulnerable but developing members of society. I argue that children have, in addition to welfare interests, interests in the development and exercise of basic moral powers. In virtue of such interests, children acquire, well before they become adults, nontrivial rights of free expression. Respecting children's rights to free expression entails limits on the prerogatives of parents and others to determine the sorts of cultural materials children should be permitted access. Nonetheless children's rights are importantly different from those of adults. …

Free Speech And Children's Interests, David Archard

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article endorses the conclusion of Etzioni's article that the First Amendment right of free speech should not trump the interests of children. However the picture is more complicated once we recognize that parents have a "basic" right to bring up their children as they see fit that may conflict with the state's duty to protect children in its jurisdiction.

Moreover there is an important difference between protecting children now from harms and safeguarding the interests of the adults they will grow into. Society has an interest in protecting children based upon its fundamental interest in ensuring the conditions of …