Law Commons^™

The Zombie First Amendment, Julie E. Cohen

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Scholarly and popular critiques of contemporary free speech jurisprudence have noted an attitude of unquestioning deference to the political power of money. Rather than sheltering the ability to speak truth to power, they have lamented, the contemporary first amendment shelters power’s ability to make and propagate its own truth. This essay relates developments in recent first amendment jurisprudence to a larger struggle now underway to shape the distribution of information power in the era of informational capitalism. In particular, it argues that cases about political speech — cases that lie at the first amendment’s traditional core — tell only a …

A Mask That Eats Into The Face: Images And The Right Of Publicity, Rebecca Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In their eagerness to reward celebrities for the power of their “images,” and to prevent other people from exploiting those images, courts have allowed the right of publicity to distort the First Amendment. The power of the visual image has allowed courts to create an inconsistent, overly expansive regime that would be easily understood as constitutionally unacceptable were the same rules applied to written words as to drawings and video games. The intersection of a conceptually unbounded right with a category of objects that courts do not handle well has created deep inconsistencies and biases in the treatment of visual …

More Than A Feeling: Emotion And The First Amendment, Rebecca Tushnet

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

First Amendment law has generally been leery of government attempts to change the marketplace of emotions—except when it has not been. Scientific evidence indicates that emotion and rationality are not opposed, as the law often presumes, but rather inextricably linked. There is no judgment, whether moral or otherwise, without emotions to guide our choices. Judicial failure to grapple with this reality has produced some puzzles in the law.

Part I of this Symposium contribution examines the intersection of private law, the First Amendment, and attempts to manipulate and control emotions. Only false factual statements can defame, not mere derogatory opinions. …