Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment; Free Speech; Hate Speech; censorship (2)
- Advocacy; First Amendment; Campaign finance; Campaign finance regulations Campaign contributions; Federal Election Campaign Act; Reform; Democracy; Purchasing political influence; Free speech values; Voting Rights Act; Freedom (1)
- Anti-Harassment Policies; Campus Policies; Department of Education; First Amendement; Universities; Protected Speech; Peer-on-per harassment; First Amendment Jurisprudence; Political correctness; Offensive Speech; Davis Standard (1)
- Attorney-client privielge; In-house consel; Content of communication; Role of In-House consel; Non-legal functions; Protected Attorney-Client communications discoverable; Business advice; Purpose and content of speech (1)
- Domestic Violence; No Drop; District Attorney; Battered Woman; VAWA; Integrated Domestic Violence (1)
-
- First Amendment; Strict Scrutiny; Protected and Unprotected speech; Censorship; Compelling government interest; Free Speech Protectionl Frist Amendment procedure (1)
- Political speech; First Amendment; Campaign finance; Federal Election Campaign Act; Political-action committees; Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act; Buckley v. Valeo; Corruption; Equality Rationale (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Protecting Hatred Preserves Freedom: Why Offensive Expressions Command Constitutional Protection, Andrew P. Napolitano
Protecting Hatred Preserves Freedom: Why Offensive Expressions Command Constitutional Protection, Andrew P. Napolitano
Journal of Law and Policy
The First Amendment is not the guardian of taste. Instead, the U.S. Constitution wholeheartedly protects freedom of thought and expression, even if generated and defined by hatred, as long as that expression does not produce immediate lawless violence. Although free speech may lead to tenuous relationships or uncomfortable debates, it must be defended unconditionally. Too many politicians and lawmakers believe that the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment attaches only to those ideas and expressions that they approve of; this is not so. This article argues that the Founders intended the First Amendment's free speech principle as a …
Freedom Of Speech And Equality: Do We Have To Choose?, Nadine Strossen
Freedom Of Speech And Equality: Do We Have To Choose?, Nadine Strossen
Journal of Law and Policy
As a lifelong activist on behalf of both equality and free speech, I am convinced, based on actual experience, that these core values are mutually reinforcing, and not, as some have argued, in tension with each other. Moreover, I am convinced that this is true even for offensive or hateful speech that affronts our most cherished beliefs. However, defining hateful or offensive speech is inherently arbitrary and subjective, which raises concerns about what speech should be restricted, and how. Empowering government to punish hateful or offensive expresson necessarily vests officials with enormous discretionary power, which will inevitably lead to arbitrary …
No Drop Prosecution & Domestic Violence: Screening For Cooperation In The City That Never Speaks, Allessandra Decarlo
No Drop Prosecution & Domestic Violence: Screening For Cooperation In The City That Never Speaks, Allessandra Decarlo
Journal of Law and Policy
Throughout history, domestic violence has been infamously kept behind closed doors and outside of our legislature. It was not until the 1960s, due to the efforts of the battered women’s movement, that the U.S. government began to address domestic violence as a social ill and offered protection to victims through statutes and policies in both State and Federal capacities. This note elaborates on one such policy, known as a “No-Drop” policy, which has been implemented by prosecutor’s offices throughout New York City’s five boroughs, as a mechanism to aggressively combat domestic violence. “No- Drop” policies allow prosecutors to vigorously prosecute …
A Balancing Act For American Universities: Anti-Harassment Policy V. Freedom Of Speech, Bridget Hart
A Balancing Act For American Universities: Anti-Harassment Policy V. Freedom Of Speech, Bridget Hart
Journal of Law and Policy
Legal scholars, educational administrators, journalists, and students have all witnessed a rise in students being disciplined by university officials for speech and conduct deemed inappropriate for college campuses. In endeavoring to explain this trend, some academics point to the disconnect between the Department of Education and university administrators regarding the legal standards for campus anti-harassment policies. The lack of clarity regarding what constitutes harassment on college campuses has resulted in the punishment of students by universities for speech and conduct that is normally considered to be protected speech under the First Amendment. This note first provides an overview of the …
When You Come To A Fork In The Road, Take It: Unifying The Split In New York's Analysis Of In-House Attorney-Client Privilege, Thomas O'Connor
When You Come To A Fork In The Road, Take It: Unifying The Split In New York's Analysis Of In-House Attorney-Client Privilege, Thomas O'Connor
Journal of Law and Policy
As one surveys the vast and ever-changing landscape of law and litigation, few things stand out as so unanimously exalted and carefully guarded as the privilege protecting attorney-client communications. Yet there is today a surprising lack of uniformity and predictability in the reasoning by which New York courts determine whether a communication made by in-house counsel to its corporate client will – or will not – enjoy the protection of that privilege. Rather than follow a single and predictable analysis to resolve the question, New York courts have oscillated between one line of decisions focusing primarily on the purpose of …
The Academy, Campaign Finance, And Free Speech Under Fire, Bradley A. Smith
The Academy, Campaign Finance, And Free Speech Under Fire, Bradley A. Smith
Journal of Law and Policy
This article discusses the issue of campaign finance and the impact money has on the political process in the country. The author suggests campaign finance regulations that curb the current threat it poses to the system, as well as the First Amendment itself. Lastly, the author discusses the impact academics have had on the debate and this decline in support of free speech that has resulted from the debate.
Where's The Fire?, Burt Neuborne
Where's The Fire?, Burt Neuborne
Journal of Law and Policy
Freedom of speech is priceless, but distressingly fragile. Life, and law, would be much simpler if we could react to free speech's importance and fragility by granting it absolute legal protection. Since, however, absolute protection of speech is not—and should not be—a serious option, we face the legal realist challenge of erecting a First Amendment legal structure capable of providing real-world protection to highly controversial speech, often by weak speakers, without closing the door to government regulation. Given the uncertainty inherent in applying fact-dependent complex rules in protean factual settings, many potential speakers would avoid being drawn into unpredictable and …
Producing Democratic Vibrancy, K. Sabeel Rahman
Producing Democratic Vibrancy, K. Sabeel Rahman
Journal of Law and Policy
Professor Rahman gives his thoughts and opinions on the impact of Citizens' United v. FEC and the growth of the First Amendment debate since. The comment analyzes the normative udnerstanding of democracy and the ongoing debate campaifgn finance have. Professor Rahman concludes by suggesting that the debate is wrongly focused on the indivudals being consumers of politcal speech rather than the producers of it.