Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 31 - 40 of 40

Full-Text Articles in Law

To What Extent Does The Power Of Government To Determine The Boundaries And Conditions Of Lawful Commerce Permit Government To Declare Who May Advertise And Who May Not?, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 2002

To What Extent Does The Power Of Government To Determine The Boundaries And Conditions Of Lawful Commerce Permit Government To Declare Who May Advertise And Who May Not?, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


Personal Rights And Rule Dependence: Can The Two Co-Exist?, Matthew D. Adler Jan 2000

Personal Rights And Rule Dependence: Can The Two Co-Exist?, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

Constitutional doctrine is typically "rule-dependent." Typically, a constitutional litigant will not prevail unless she can show that a particular kind of legal rule is in force, e.g., a rule that discriminates against "suspect classes" in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, or that targets speech in violation of the First Amendment, or that is motivated by a religious purpose in violation of the Establishment Clause. Further, the litigant must typically establish a violation of her "personal rights." The Supreme Court has consistently stated that a reviewing court should not invalidate an unconstitutional governmental action at the instance of a claimant …


Rights, Rules And The Structure Of Constitutional Adjudication: A Response To Professor Fallon, Matthew D. Adler Jan 2000

Rights, Rules And The Structure Of Constitutional Adjudication: A Response To Professor Fallon, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

Constitutional doctrine is typically rule-dependent. A viable constitutional challenge typically hinges upon the existence of a discriminatory, overbroad, improperly motivated, or otherwise invalid rule, to which the claimant has some nexus. In a prior article, Prof. Adler proposed one model of constitutional adjudication that tries to make sense of rule-dependence. He argued that reviewing courts are not vindicating the personal rights of claimants, but rather are repealing or amending invalid rules. IN a Commentary in this issue, Professor Fallon now puts forward a different model of constitutional adjudication, equally consistent with rule-dependence. Fallon proposes that a reviewing court should overturn …


Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure Of American Constitutional Law, Matthew D. Adler Jan 1998

Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure Of American Constitutional Law, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

Constitutional rights are conventionally thought to be "personal" rights. The successful constitutional litigant is thought to have a valid claim that some constitutional wrong has or would be been done "to her"; the case of "overbreadth," where a litigant prevails even though her own conduct is permissibly regulated, is thought to be unique to the First Amendment. This "personal" or "as-applied" view of constitutional adjudication has been consistently and pervasively endorsed by the Supreme Court, and is standardly adopted by legal scholars.

In this Article, I argue that the conventional view is incorrect. Constitutional rights, I claim, are rights against …


Quo Vadis, Posadas?, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 1998

Quo Vadis, Posadas?, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This examination looks at Virginia's ban on speech advertising motorcycles and revisits the question raised in the Posadas decision - may a state ban speech about a legal product the state could ban if it so desired. This article uses comparisons to the government employee speech cases to further illuminate the issue.


Remembering Melville Nimmer: Some Cautionary Notes On Commercial Speech, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 1996

Remembering Melville Nimmer: Some Cautionary Notes On Commercial Speech, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This examination concerns itself with two main questions: what qualifies as commercial speech and how much protection does commercial speech enjoy under the First Amendment when compared to other forms of speech. The trend of the Court indicates that commercial speech enjoys protections similar to political speech.


A Judicial Postscript To The Church-State Debates Of 1989: How Porous The Wall, How Civil The State?, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 1990

A Judicial Postscript To The Church-State Debates Of 1989: How Porous The Wall, How Civil The State?, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This work is a continuation of the debate regarding the Establishment Clause. The focus lies with Justice O’Connor’s concurrence in County of Allegheny v. ACLU and how this opinion harkens back to a concept shared by Jefferson and Madison, that the establishment clause is designed to prevent government favoritism.


Congressional Power And Free Speech: Levy’S Legacy Revisited, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 1986

Congressional Power And Free Speech: Levy’S Legacy Revisited, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


A Graphic Review Of The Free Speech Clause, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 1982

A Graphic Review Of The Free Speech Clause, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This work acts as a spring board for the study of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. It builds useful graphical representations of complex constitutional theories from the ground up, allowing students to follow both development and the application of these theories.


The First Amendment And The Free Press: A Comment On Some New Trends And Some Old Theories, William W. Van Alstyne Jan 1980

The First Amendment And The Free Press: A Comment On Some New Trends And Some Old Theories, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

Responding to the trend of media rights being subjugated through the legal process, this article examines Justice Stewart's suggestion that the media should be treated with extra deference in First Amendment cases. This examination looks at the sufficiency of the press's claim of judicial harshness, whether the press should be treated differently than other speakers, and also compares press freedom in foreign nations.