Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
It's Time For Revenge Porn To Get A Taste Of Its Own Medicine: An Argument For The Federal Criminalization Of Revenge Porn, Taylor Linkous
It's Time For Revenge Porn To Get A Taste Of Its Own Medicine: An Argument For The Federal Criminalization Of Revenge Porn, Taylor Linkous
Law Student Publications
This comment analyzes the various potential legal approaches to dealing with revenge porn and posits that a federal law criminalizing the dissemination of revenge porn is necessary to combat this growing trend. Part II provides background information on revenge porn and further analyzes how the successful relationship between technology and pornography led to the rise of revenge porn. Part III analyzes the different civil remedies currently available to revenge porn victims and argues these are not practicable solutions. Part IV discusses the current state laws criminalizing revenge porn and the legal challenges faced by those affected by revenge porn and …
Speech Of Government Employees, Ann C. Hodges
Speech Of Government Employees, Ann C. Hodges
Law Faculty Publications
For many years, government employment was considered a privilege rather than a right, and, as a result, the government could place restrictions on employee speech that would be unconstitutional if applied to citizens.
Matters Of Public Concern Standard In Free Speech Cases, Ann C. Hodges
Matters Of Public Concern Standard In Free Speech Cases, Ann C. Hodges
Law Faculty Publications
The public concern standard has operated primarily in two categories of free-speech cases: those involving speech by government employees and those involving defamation.
Disciplining Public Employees For Expressive Activity, Ann C. Hodges
Disciplining Public Employees For Expressive Activity, Ann C. Hodges
Law Faculty Publications
A public employee's right to free speech under the First Amendment is not unlimited and employers have the right to discipline employees for expressive activity under certain circumstances (Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 1968). The employer has an interest in ensuring that its etnployees do not under1nine its operations or ll1terfere with acco1nplishment of its objectives. At the same time, employees do not give up their constitutional rights when they accept government employment.
Constitutional Law - Attorney's Loyalty Fitness, W. Wade Berryhill
Constitutional Law - Attorney's Loyalty Fitness, W. Wade Berryhill
Law Faculty Publications
One may reasonably conclude that a state may escape invalidation of a statute which apparently exceeds permissible Bill of Rights limits if the state shows that the statute does not operatively mean what it appears to say, but rather requires only an allegiance to the Constitution, and secondly, that a state may properly make inquiries to determine the oath affirmant's sincerity and good faith.