Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (360)
- William & Mary Law School (318)
- University of North Carolina School of Law (238)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (196)
- Pepperdine University (194)
-
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (192)
- Brigham Young University Law School (185)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (178)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (131)
- UIC School of Law (120)
- Seattle University School of Law (116)
- St. John's University School of Law (102)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (99)
- West Virginia University (90)
- Cleveland State University (87)
- Fordham Law School (86)
- The University of Akron (83)
- University of Richmond (83)
- Brooklyn Law School (74)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (73)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (69)
- University of Washington School of Law (69)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (66)
- University of Kentucky (64)
- University of Georgia School of Law (59)
- Notre Dame Law School (57)
- University of Miami Law School (56)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (52)
- Mercer University School of Law (50)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (43)
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment (747)
- Freedom of speech (361)
- First amendment (311)
- Free speech (223)
- Freedom of Speech (201)
-
- United States Constitution 1st Amendment (186)
- Supreme Court (143)
- Religion (105)
- Constitutional law (101)
- Constitution (96)
- United States Supreme Court (93)
- Establishment Clause (92)
- Censorship (86)
- Freedom of religion (86)
- Obscenity (86)
- Constitutional Law (83)
- Establishment clause (78)
- Internet (78)
- Defamation (75)
- Free Speech (74)
- Freedom of the press (73)
- Speech (71)
- Freedom of expression (66)
- Privacy (64)
- Social media (61)
- Commercial speech (55)
- Freedom of Religion (47)
- Regulation (47)
- Freedom of the Press (46)
- New York (45)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (257)
- First Amendment Law Review (238)
- Touro Law Review (190)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (174)
- Pepperdine Law Review (162)
-
- BYU Law Review (135)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (121)
- William & Mary Law Review (121)
- Seattle University Law Review (114)
- UIC Law Review (94)
- Indiana Law Journal (92)
- West Virginia Law Review (90)
- Federal Communications Law Journal (89)
- Villanova Law Review (86)
- Akron Law Review (80)
- Cleveland State Law Review (77)
- The Catholic Lawyer (75)
- Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology (72)
- Kentucky Law Journal (64)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review (61)
- Washington Law Review (61)
- University of Richmond Law Review (59)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (53)
- Fordham Law Review (52)
- University of Miami Law Review (52)
- Mercer Law Review (50)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law (49)
- Maryland Law Review (48)
- Oklahoma Law Review (48)
- Brooklyn Law Review (42)
- File Type
Articles 721 - 750 of 4365
Full-Text Articles in Law
Pre-Game Strategy For Long-Term Win: Using Trademark Registration And Right Of Publicity To Protect Esports Gamers, John Bat
Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology
The soaring popularity of esports across the globe has turned ultra-talented gamers into a blend of athlete and entertainer. The youthful esports ecosystem is exploding in growth, and the world is taking notice. But are the gamers who are eyeing professional play taking basic legal steps to develop and shield their brands, as well as bolster their collective negotiating leverage with teams, leagues, and miscellaneous entities? This note explores what features of an up-and-coming esports gamer might be worth protecting through a trademark and/or personality-rights schema, which in turn, could assist competitive gamers who are interested in developing their careers …
Hate Wins, Courtney Lauren Anderson
Hate Wins, Courtney Lauren Anderson
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal
The controversy surrounding the conflict between hate crimes and the First Amendment makes the task of even defining hate crimes difficult. Actions that some find prejudicial are simply expressive to others. This diversion obstructs efforts to collect data on hate crimes and deploy a unified legal or prosecutorial response. The antidiscrimination purpose of the Fair Housing Act is known, despite questions surrounding the Act’s breadth, and the inconsistent prioritization and interpretation of the Act that comes with changing the person who holds the position of the Secretary of the Office of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This paper sets forth …
Symposium Introduction, William D. Araiza, Joel M. Gora
Symposium Introduction, William D. Araiza, Joel M. Gora
Brooklyn Law Review
On April 12, 2019, scholars gathered at Brooklyn Law School to consider the past, the present, and the future of free speech, and concerns about incitement that militate toward suppression. The speakers provided incisive and timely insight on these important matters—insight that is reflected in the papers published in this symposium issue of the Brooklyn Law Review. This introduction provides an overview of this symposium issue and the questions presented by each article.
In Defense Of Brandenburg: The Aclu And Incitement Doctrine In 1919, 1969, And 2019, Emerson J. Sykes
In Defense Of Brandenburg: The Aclu And Incitement Doctrine In 1919, 1969, And 2019, Emerson J. Sykes
Brooklyn Law Review
In the United States, full-throated advocacy—even advocacy of violence—is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. Few other countries define “incitement to violence” as narrowly, and governments tend to exploit any authority to regulate speech. The ACLU has played a central role in developing America’s speech-protective modern incitement doctrine over the last century, sometimes by representing clients with abhorrent views, including in the landmark Brandenburg v. Ohio. The Brandenburg test sets a high bar for incitement that should be maintained, even with respect to online speech. Calls for increased regulation of speech should not be heeded.
Assumptions About “Terrorism” And The Brandenburg Incitement Test, Christina E. Wells
Assumptions About “Terrorism” And The Brandenburg Incitement Test, Christina E. Wells
Brooklyn Law Review
The incitement standard announced in Brandenburg v. Ohio, which bars government officials from punishing advocacy of illegal activity unless it is directed and likely to imminently incite such activity, is one of the most speech-protective tests in the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence. However, terrorist advocacy – glorification of violence, spreading of propaganda, and recruitment of individuals to their cause – is putting pressure on the Brandenburg standard. Scholars have suggested working around Brandenburg’s incitement standard to counter the dangerous influence of terrorist advocacy, especially online advocacy. Although scholars’ concern with the harms of terrorism is understandable, their willingness to alter Brandenburg …
The First Amendment And The Imminence Of Harm, Floyd Abrams
The First Amendment And The Imminence Of Harm, Floyd Abrams
Brooklyn Law Review
Noted First Amendment litigator Floyd Abrams engages questions about the past, the present and the future of free speech directly by considering the key words from Justice Holmes’s canonical formulation for the constitutional standard governing regulation of incitement speech—the requirement that any danger justifying such speech regulation must be “clear and present.” Mr. Abrams asks what types of “danger” are sufficiently “present” to provide that justification, using as examples the Communist teachings at issue in Dennis v. United States and The Progressive magazine’s publication of plans for constructing a hydrogen bomb. While Mr. Abrams reaches no hard and fast conclusion …
Brandenburg And Terrorism In The Digital Age, David S. Han
Brandenburg And Terrorism In The Digital Age, David S. Han
Brooklyn Law Review
This essay explores the tension between the longstanding Brandenburg standard and the current technological context—one in which abstract advocacy of terrorist conduct, widely and cheaply disseminated through the internet and channeled through social media, has contributed to a number of devastating attacks such as the Orlando nightclub shooting, the Boston marathon bombings, and the shootings in San Bernardino. It does so through the lens of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Carpenter v. United States—a Fourth Amendment case that similarly dealt with the collision between the longstanding constitutional righThis essay explores the tension between the longstanding Brandenburg standard and the …
#Losingthethread: Recognizing Assembly Rights In The New Public Forum, Liz Grefrath
#Losingthethread: Recognizing Assembly Rights In The New Public Forum, Liz Grefrath
Brooklyn Law Review
The specter of banishment from the vibrant public forum of social media to the empty streets and deserted sidewalks is a matter of increasing political, social, and cultural importance. Today, nearly every government official maintains a social media presence on Facebook or Twitter, generally to promote initiatives, share ideological positions, engage constituents, and tangle with critics. Privacy controls and content moderation tools, however, offer government officials tantalizing opportunities to discretely and effectively muffle disapproval, stifle dissent, and shield themselves from criticism on their public social media pages through “blocking” features. Courts are just starting to grapple with the First Amendment …
Words We Fear: Burning Tweets & The Politics Of Incitement, Rachel E. Vanlandingham
Words We Fear: Burning Tweets & The Politics Of Incitement, Rachel E. Vanlandingham
Brooklyn Law Review
The United States government has long wrestled with the link between speech and violence, periodically employing speculative claims of potential violence and law-breaking to suppress political speech in times of national insecurity. By the late 1960s, however, the Supreme Court fully operationalized the First Amendment’s premise that most government speech suppression is antithetical to self-government, individual autonomy, equality, and liberty. The Court therefore, required immediacy of potential violence before the government could punish speech advocating such illegality, but left private actors free to censor and suppress speech. Today, social media companies, at the behest of the government, are doing what …
"Incitement Lite" For The Nonpublic Forum, Leslie Gielow Jacobs
"Incitement Lite" For The Nonpublic Forum, Leslie Gielow Jacobs
Brooklyn Law Review
The incitement exception set out in Brandenburg v. Ohio defines the authority of the government, acting in its sovereign capacity, to impose criminal punishment on speakers because the content of their advocacy may persuade listeners to commit crimes. Nonpublic forum managers have much greater flexibility than the government-as-sovereign to restrict the private speakers they invite onto their property because the content of their speech may persuade listeners to engage in harmful conduct. In nonpublic forum management, speakers experience no sanctions and, unlike the government-as-sovereign, nonpublic forum managers may close their forums to all private speakers to avoid unwanted speech. This …
International Standards For Protection Of Religious Freedom, Anthony Peirson Xavier Bothwell
International Standards For Protection Of Religious Freedom, Anthony Peirson Xavier Bothwell
Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, inspired by the “four freedoms” articulated by Franklin D. Roosevelt, proclaims but does not define the religious liberty that is the birthright of all people. Four centuries ago, when few people were free, religious ideas fostered the development of some of the fundamental principles of the law of nations. As international law has matured, increasingly it has recognized the right of individuals and groups to pursue their own religions and beliefs. The United Nations system has generated an array of international conventions, covenants, and resolutions which today articulate the rights of adherents to all …
Censorship, Free Speech & Facebook: Applying The First Amendment To Social Media Platforms Via The Public Function Exception, Matthew P. Hooker
Censorship, Free Speech & Facebook: Applying The First Amendment To Social Media Platforms Via The Public Function Exception, Matthew P. Hooker
Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts
Society has a love-hate relationship with social media. Thanks to social media platforms, the world is more connected than ever before. But with the ever-growing dominance of social media there have come a mass of challenges. What is okay to post? What isn't? And who or what should be regulating those standards? Platforms are now constantly criticized for their content regulation policies, sometimes because they are viewed as too harsh and other times because they are characterized as too lax. And naturally, the First Amendment quickly enters the conversation. Should social media platforms be subject to the First Amendment? Can—or …
Setting Our Feet: The Foundations Of Religious And Conscience Protections, Hanna Torline
Setting Our Feet: The Foundations Of Religious And Conscience Protections, Hanna Torline
Notre Dame Law Review
This Note does not attempt to claim that religion and conscience are not moral equivalents, that they are not equally important, or that they do not require equal legal treatment. Nor does it attempt to claim the converse. Simply put, it argues that a consideration of the different foundations underlying conscience protections and religious protections should give pause to anyone arguing that the two are equivalent. This Note concludes that the rationales behind protecting religion and conscience are different enough to merit consideration in the debate. For if religion and conscience are treated as equivalents under the law, they will …
The Long Road Back To Skokie: Returning The First Amendment To Mask Wearers, Rob Kahn
The Long Road Back To Skokie: Returning The First Amendment To Mask Wearers, Rob Kahn
Journal of Law and Policy
When the Seventh Circuit upheld the First Amendment right of Nazis to march in Skokie, Illinois in 1978, the protection of mask wearers was not far behind. Since then, doctrinal paths have diverged. While the Supreme Court continues to protect hate speech, mask wearing has been increasingly placed outside First Amendment protection. This article seeks to get to the bottom of this doctrinal divergence by addressing the symbolic purposes of mask bans—rooted in repudiating the Ku Klux Klan—as well as the doctrinal steps taken over the past forty years to restrict the First Amendment claims of mask wearers. It also …
De Facto State: Social Media Networks And The First Amendment, Paul Domer
De Facto State: Social Media Networks And The First Amendment, Paul Domer
Notre Dame Law Review
In Marsh v. Alabama, a Jehovah’s Witness was arrested and convicted of trespassing for proselytizing on a public sidewalk that nonetheless was, like everything else in the “company town,” privately owned. The Court reversed, holding that the First and Fourteenth Amendments applied against a private actor if it exercised all the powers and responsibilities traditionally associated with a government—policing, utilities, and traffic control, for example. Writing for the majority, Justice Black declared, “The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the …
Bitcoin Is Speech: Notes Toward Developing The Conceptual Contours Of Its Protection Under The First Amendment, Justin S. Wales, Richard J. Ovelmen
Bitcoin Is Speech: Notes Toward Developing The Conceptual Contours Of Its Protection Under The First Amendment, Justin S. Wales, Richard J. Ovelmen
University of Miami Law Review
Bitcoin permits users to engage in direct expressive activity with one another without the need for centralized intermediaries. It does so by utilizing an open and community-managed global database called a blockchain. While much of the literature about Bitcoin has focused on its use as a form of digital payment, this Article suggests an expanded understanding by demonstrating its use as a protocol network, not unlike the internet, that can be used to extend the possible range of human expression. After developing an appreciation of the technology, this Article recommends a framework for applying the First Amendment to Bitcoin and …
Left With No Name: How Government Action In Intra-Church Trademark Disputes Violates The Free Exercise Clause Of The First Amendment, Mary Kate Nicholson
Left With No Name: How Government Action In Intra-Church Trademark Disputes Violates The Free Exercise Clause Of The First Amendment, Mary Kate Nicholson
Washington and Lee Law Review
The United States was founded in part on the principle of freedom of religion, where citizens were free to practice any religion. The founding fathers felt so strongly about this principle that it was incorporated into the First Amendment. The Free Exercise Clause states that “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .” The Supreme Court later adopted the neutral principles approach to avoid Free Exercise violations resulting from courts deciding real property disputes. Without the application of the same neutral principles to intellectual property disputes between churches, however, there is …
The Integrity Of Marriage, Kaiponanea T. Matsumura
The Integrity Of Marriage, Kaiponanea T. Matsumura
William & Mary Law Review
While the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges resolved a dispute about access to legal marriage, it also exposed a rift between the Justices about what rights, obligations, and social meanings marriage should entail. The majority opinion described marriage as a “unified whole” comprised of “essential attributes,” both legal and extralegal. The dissents, in contrast, were more skeptical about marriage’s inherent legal content. Justice Scalia, for instance, characterized marriage as a mere bundle of “civil consequences” attached to “whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements [the law] wishes.” This side debate has taken center stage in several recent disputes. In …
Political Activist + Public Servant?, Sharon Murchie
Political Activist + Public Servant?, Sharon Murchie
Language Arts Journal of Michigan
How do we write as political activists while also working as public servants? Do we have freedom of speech as public school teachers? Can—and should—our writing and our speech be censored? How can we write and work for social and political change, when we are charged with remaining apolitical in the classroom? This article outlines the limitations on teachers’ First Amendment Rights and is both a call to action and a call to caution.
Does The Clear And Present Danger Test Survive Cost-Benefit Analysis?, Cass R. Sunstein
Does The Clear And Present Danger Test Survive Cost-Benefit Analysis?, Cass R. Sunstein
Cornell Law Review
Under American regulatory law, the dominant contemporary test involves cost-benefit analysis. The benefits of regulation must justify the costs; if they do, regulation is permissible and even mandatory. Under American free speech law, in sharp contrast, an important contemporary test for the regulation of speech involves "clear and present danger." In general, officials cannot censor or regulate political speech on the ground that the benefits of regulation justify the costs. They may proceed only if the speech is likely to produce imminent lawless action. In principle, it is not simple to explain why the free speech test does not involve …
Why Section 230 Is Better Than The First Amendment, Eric Goldman
Why Section 230 Is Better Than The First Amendment, Eric Goldman
Notre Dame Law Review Reflection
47 U.S.C. § 230 (“Section 230”) immunizes Internet services from liability for third-party content. This immunity acts as a crucial legal foundation for the modern Internet. However, growing skepticism about the Internet has placed the immunity in regulators’ sights.
If the First Amendment mirrors Section 230’s speech protections, narrowing Section 230 would be inconsequential. This Essay explains why that is not the case. Section 230 provides defendants with more substantive and procedural benefits than the First Amendment does. Because the First Amendment does not backfill these benefits, reductions to Section 230’s scope pose serious risks to Internet speech.
Online Threats: The Dire Need For A Reboot In True Threats Jurisprudence, John Sivils
Online Threats: The Dire Need For A Reboot In True Threats Jurisprudence, John Sivils
SMU Law Review Forum
No abstract provided.
American Legion V. American Humanist Association, Seth T. Bonilla
American Legion V. American Humanist Association, Seth T. Bonilla
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The separation of church and state is a key element of American democracy, but its interpretation has been challenged as the country grows more diverse. In American Legion v. American Humanist Association, the Supreme Court adopted a new standard to analyze whether a religious symbol on public land maintained by public funding violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause.
Making Room For Big Data: Web Scraping And An Affirmative Right To Access Publicly Available Information Online, Amber Zamora
Making Room For Big Data: Web Scraping And An Affirmative Right To Access Publicly Available Information Online, Amber Zamora
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
This paper will explore the legality of web scraping through the lens of recent litigation between web scraper hiQ Labs and the online professional networking platform, LinkedIn. First, the paper will study the background of web scraping litigation, some challenges courts face in issuing consistent verdicts, and the most common claims companies make against web scrapers. Then the paper will address three of the most common claims and identify court motivations and limitations within the doctrines. The first claims are those arising from the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Next, the paper will investigate copyright claims and defenses …
Speech Narcissism, Terri R. Day, Danielle Weatherby
Speech Narcissism, Terri R. Day, Danielle Weatherby
Florida Law Review
From its embryonic stage during the civil rights era to its modern-day presence on college campuses, the political correctness movement has undergone an extreme metamorphosis. In the university setting, it was originally intended to welcome diverse views by encouraging minority students to feel part of the learning environment and to contribute to the “marketplace of ideas.” Recently, however, as students more frequently demand trigger warnings and safe spaces in response to speech that they deem personally offensive, the use of political correctness measures on college campuses has had the unintended consequence of chilling speech. Contrary to longstanding First Amendment principles, …
Digitizing The Schoolhouse Gate: Protecting Students’ Off-Campus Cyberspeech By Switching The Safety On Tinker’S Trigger, Joshua Rieger
Digitizing The Schoolhouse Gate: Protecting Students’ Off-Campus Cyberspeech By Switching The Safety On Tinker’S Trigger, Joshua Rieger
Florida Law Review
Secondary-school students regularly engage in cyberspeech both inside and outside the schoolhouse gate. Internet-era forms of communication allow these students to produce off-campus cyberspeech that can easily be accessed or brought onto campus by other students or faculty. As early as the 1990s, public-school administrations began punishing students for off-campus cyberspeech, accessed or brought onto campus, that the administrations deemed threatening, intimidating, harassing, or generally inappropriate for the school setting. Parents continue to challenge public-school administrations’ punishments of their children by filing civil suits in federal courts claiming these administrations violated their children’s First Amendment right to free speech. Whether …
Redefining “Revenge Porn” Reform: A View From The Front Lines, Mary Anne Franks
Redefining “Revenge Porn” Reform: A View From The Front Lines, Mary Anne Franks
Florida Law Review
The legal and social landscape of “revenge porn” has changed dramatically in the last few years. Before 2013, only three states criminalized the unauthorized disclosure of sexually explicit images of adults and few people had ever heard the term “revenge porn.” As of July 2017, thirty-eight states and Washington, D.C. had criminalized the conduct; federal criminal legislation on the issue had been introduced in Congress; Google, Facebook, and Twitter had banned nonconsensual pornography from their platforms; and the term “revenge porn” had been added to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. I have had the privilege of playing a role in many of …
When Legislatures Become The Ally Of Academic Freedom: The First State Intellectual Diversity Statute And Its Effect On Academic Freedom, Patrick M. Garry
When Legislatures Become The Ally Of Academic Freedom: The First State Intellectual Diversity Statute And Its Effect On Academic Freedom, Patrick M. Garry
South Carolina Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Moral Hazard And Campus Speech, Jamal Greene
Constitutional Moral Hazard And Campus Speech, Jamal Greene
William & Mary Law Review
One underappreciated cost of constitutional rights enforcement is moral hazard. In economics, moral hazard refers to the increased propensity of insured individuals to engage in costly behavior. This Essay concerns what I call “constitutional moral hazard,” defined as the use of constitutional rights (or their conspicuous absence) to shield potentially destructive behavior from moral or pragmatic assessment. What I have in mind here is not simply the risk that people will make poor decisions when they have a right to do so, but that people may, at times, make poor decisions because they have a right. Moral hazard is not …
The Post-Truth First Amendment, Sarah Haan
The Post-Truth First Amendment, Sarah Haan
Indiana Law Journal
Post-truthism is widely viewed as a political problem. This Article explores posttruthism as a constitutional law problem, and argues that, because post-truthism offers a normative framework for regulating information, we should take it seriously as a basis for law.
In its exploration of the influence of post-truth ideas on law, the Article focuses on the compelled speech doctrine. When the State mandates disclosure, it pits the interests of unwilling speakers against the interests of listeners. In the twenty-first century, speakers who are targeted by mandatory disclosure laws are often organizational actors with informational advantages, such as corporations. Listeners who stand …