Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
What's At Stake?: Bluman V. Federal Election Commission And The Incompatibility Of The Stake-Based Immigration Plenary Power And Freedom Of Speech, Alyssa Markenson
What's At Stake?: Bluman V. Federal Election Commission And The Incompatibility Of The Stake-Based Immigration Plenary Power And Freedom Of Speech, Alyssa Markenson
Northwestern University Law Review
Section 441e of the U.S. Code prohibits “foreign nationals”—all noncitizens except lawful permanent residents—from making any contribution or expenditure in any federal, state, or local election. In Bluman v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court summarily affirmed a three-judge district court’s decision to uphold the law based on the government’s compelling interest in preventing foreign influence over U.S. elections. Notably, Bluman’s holding was animated by its reasoning that the extent of First Amendment protection should be directly tied to the aliens’ stake in American society—a reflection of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence since the middle of the twentieth century that seeks …
Cracking Open The Classroom Door: Developing A First Amendment Standard For Curricular Speech, Nicholas K. Tygesson
Cracking Open The Classroom Door: Developing A First Amendment Standard For Curricular Speech, Nicholas K. Tygesson
Northwestern University Law Review
Around this country, courts have found that the discharge of public school teachers for their classroom speech does not implicate the First Amendment. Others have protected this speech, but only by importing analytical approaches from other areas of law ill suited to the unique interests at play in America’s public schools. The resulting patchwork of doctrinal approaches provides little clarity for courts and only illusory protection for teachers. This Note will start from scratch, examining the first principles at play in public school classrooms and tailoring a First Amendment approach to respect the needs of government, teachers, and students. When …
Ties That Bind? The Questionable Consent Justification For Hosanna-Tabor, Jessie Hill
Ties That Bind? The Questionable Consent Justification For Hosanna-Tabor, Jessie Hill
Northwestern University Law Review
Arguments in favor of religious sovereignty often emphasize the benefits of autonomy for religious institutions while ignoring the civil rights of individuals who belong to or work for those institutions. To justify intrusions on individual civil rights, proponents of strong religious autonomy generally rely on the concept of implied consent. According to this rationale, individuals willingly give up the protection of civil rights laws when they voluntarily join religious organizations. This Essay responds to one scholar’s account of the consent rationale as undergirding the Supreme Court’s recognition of the ministerial exception: Christopher Lund’s excellent article, Free Exercise Reconceived: The Logic …
Apple Pie Propaganda? The Smith–Mundt Act Before And After The Repeal Of The Domestic Dissemination Ban, Weston R. Sager
Apple Pie Propaganda? The Smith–Mundt Act Before And After The Repeal Of The Domestic Dissemination Ban, Weston R. Sager
Northwestern University Law Review
For over sixty years, the Smith–Mundt Act prohibited the U.S. Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) from disseminating government-produced programming within the United States over fears that these agencies would “propagandize” the American people. However, in 2013, Congress abolished the domestic dissemination ban, which has led to a heated debate about the role of the federal government in free public discourse. Although the 2013 repeal of the domestic dissemination ban promotes greater government transparency and may help counter anti-American sentiment at home, it also gives the federal government great power to covertly influence public opinion. To …