Law Commons^™

Lee V. Weisman: A New Age For Establishment Clause Jurisprudence?, Elizabeth Brandt

Articles

No abstract provided.

Challenging The Autonomous Press (Book Review), Lili Levi

Articles

No abstract provided.

Does The Camel Have Its Nose In The Tent: Individual Religious Freedom V. Prayer In Public Schools, Elizabeth Brandt

Articles

No abstract provided.

Comment On Preliminary Report On Freedom Of Expression And Campus Harassment Codes, Terrance Sandalow

Articles

Campus harassment codes pose an unprecedented problem for the AAUP, not only because the issues of academic freedom they raise are novel, but also because the academic community is itself deeply divided over those issues. Historically, the major assaults upon academic freedom have come from outside the academy--from politicians, trustees, and donors who have sought to limit inquiry and restrict the expression of unpopular views. Ideas about academic freedom have been shaped in the course of repelling these assaults and in constructing barricades that will safeguard the freedoms to teach and to learn that are at the center of the …

"Libelous" Petitions For Redress Of Grievances -- Bad Historiography Makes Worse Law, Eric Schnapper

Articles

Both the majority and concurring opinions in McDonald v. Smith, 472 U.S. 479 (1985), concluded that there was no historical basis for McDonald's contention that the framers understood the right to petition to include an unqualified right to do so without being subject to suit for libel. This Article argues that the historical analysis in McDonaldis incorrect; indeed, this appears to be one instance in which the relevant historical materials are both voluminous and crystal clear.

Part I evaluates the McDonald Court's discussion of the intent of the framers. Subsequent sections discuss the wide variety of materials that …

Free Speech And Corporate Freedom: A Comment On First National Bank Of Boston V. Bellotti, Carl E. Schneider

Articles

The corporation was born in chains but is everywhere free. That freedom was recently affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti. In Bellotti, the Court overturned a Massachusetts criminal statute forbidding banks and business corporations to make expenditures intended to influence referenda concerning issues not "materially affecting" the corporation's "property, business, or assets." In doing so, the Court confirmed its discovery that commercial speech is not unprotected by the first amendment and announced a novel doctrine that corporate speech is not unprotected by the first amendment. Although several years have …

Hawaiian Ripples, Patricia D. White

Articles

Bacchus Imports, Ltd. and Eagle Distributors, Inc.

v.

George Freitas, Director of Taxation of the State of Hawaii

(Docket No. 82-1565)

Argued January 11, 1984

Government Liability For Unconstitutional Land Use Regulation, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

No abstract provided.

Error Correction, Lawmaking, And The Supreme Court’S Exercise Of Discretionary Review, Arthur D. Hellman

Articles

Controversies involving the United States Supreme Court generally center on the content of Court’s decisions, but in recent years, much attention has focused on the Court’s processes – in particular, two very different aspects of the Court’s modes of doing business. At one end of the spectrum, the number of cases receiving plenary consideration – full briefing, oral argument, and (almost invariably) a signed opinion – has shrunk to levels lower than any since the Civil War. At the other end, the Court has effectively resolved many high-profile disputes through unexplained orders granting or denying emergency relief in cases in …

Free Speech Or Economic Weapon? The Persisting Problem Of Picketing, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

"Peaceful picketing," the United States Supreme Court has said, "is the workingman's means of communication."' One line of analysis is that, as a means of communication, picketing is free speech and is therefore entitled to every constitutional protection afforded other forms of expression. This means that it cannot be subjected to special restrictions, such as antiboycott curbs, simply because it is picketing. The opposing line of analysis is that picketing is not simply speech; it is "speech plus." The "plus" element removes picketing from the realm of pure speech and enables it to be regulated in ways that the Constitution …

Extracting Documents And Information From The Internal Revenue Service, Stuart E. Siegel, Stanley I. Langbein

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Business Of The Supreme Court Under The Judiciary Act Of 1925: The Plenary Docket In The 1970'S, Arthur D. Hellman

Articles

During the last decade, the Supreme Court has been deciding 65 to 70 cases a Term after oral argument. That represents a sharp decline from the 1970s and 1980s, the era of the Burger Court, when the Court was deciding about 150 cases a Term. The Burger Court’s docket, in turn, reflected a shift from the 1960s, when the docket was smaller. In short, what is “normal” for the plenary docket varies from one era to another. The period of the Burger Court retains a special interest in that regard because that was the only period after World War II …

Elfbrandt V. Russell: The Demise Of The Loyalty Oath, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

In Elfbrandt v. Russell, the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision, declared unconstitutional Arizona's requirement of a loyalty oath from state employees. At first glance, Elfbrandt appears to be just another decision voiding a state loyalty oath on limited grounds relating to the specific language of the particular oath. Yet, several aspects of Mr. Justice Douglas' opinion for the majority suggest that Elfbrandt is really of far greater significance: it may sharply limit the scope and coverage of loyalty oaths generally and, indeed, may presage a ruling invalidating all such oaths. Of course, only the Supreme Court can determine this. …