Law Commons^™

Tinkering With The Schoolhouse Gate: The Future Of Student Speech After Mahanoy Area School District V. B.L., Victoria R. Bonds

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

When the Supreme Court last created a rule about students’ First Amendment rights, MySpace was the most popular social media platform. Students’ use of social media and technology has radically changed since then, and it is time the First Amendment case law reflects that. With the transition to online learning after the COVID-19 pandemic and overall increased reliance on technology, students need clear answers about when school officials can punish them for their social media posts.

The Supreme Court had a chance to clarify First Amendment student speech law this year in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., but …

Free Speech In The Balance: Judicial Sanctions And Frivolous Slapp Suits, Shine Sean Tu, Nicholas F. Stump

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The balance between free speech and access to courts in defamation tort actions is fraught with public policy concerns. On one hand, plaintiffs should have unencumbered access to the justice system to remedy real harms brought upon them by defamatory statements. However, defamation suits should not be wielded to suppress the constitutionally protected free speech rights of news organizations and of concerned citizens that are vital for well-functioning democracies. This Article argues for a new type of remedy, namely enhanced Rule 11 attorney sanctions, such as suspension or debarment, that should be available to defendants of defamation suits brought by …

Hot Off The Press: An Argument For A Federal Shield Law Affording A Qualified Evidentiary Privilege To Journalists In Light Of Renewed Concerns About Freedom Of The Press And National Security, Nicole N. Wentworth

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unringing The Bell: Publicly Funded Art And The Government Speech Doctrine, John Barlow

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

This Article advances the novel argument that within the domain of removing publicly funded art from public display, the application of the Government Speech Doctrine is improper because of the current scope and policy considerations of the Doctrine, the mutable nature of art speech, and artist moral rights. As an alternative, this Article proposes a model statute legislatures should adopt that outlines an appropriate analytical framework for removing public art from public display that takes into consideration individual free speech rights, the government’s right to control its own messages, the nature of art speech, and artist moral rights.

Protecting Speech, Protecting Privacy: The Future Costs Of U.K. Libel Claims, Adelaide Scardino Lopez

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.