Law Commons^™

Clouded Precedent: Tandon V. Newsom And Its Implications For The Shadow Docket, Alexander Gouzoules

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court’s “shadow docket”—the decisions issued outside its procedures for deciding cases on the merits—has drawn increasing attention and criticism from scholars, commentators, and elected representatives. Shadow docket decisions have been criticized on the grounds that they are made without the benefit of full briefing and argument, and because their abbreviated, per curiam opinions can be difficult for lower courts to interpret.

A spate of shadow docket decisions in the context of free-exercise challenges to COVID-19 public health orders culminated in Tandon v. Newsom, a potentially groundbreaking decision that may upend longstanding doctrines governing claims brought under the Free …

Religious Rights In Historical, Theoretical And International Context: Hobby Lobby As A Jurisprudential Anomaly, S. I. Strong

Faculty Publications

The United States has a long and complicated history concerning religious rights, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., has done little to clear up the jurisprudence in this field. Although the decision will doubtless generate a great deal of commentary as a matter of constitutional and statutory law, the better approach is to consider whether and to what extent the majority and dissenting opinions reflect the fundamental principles of religious liberty. Only in that context can the merits of such a novel decision be evaluated free from political and other biases.

This …

Protest, Policing, And The Petition Clause: A Review Of Ronald Krotoszynski's Reclaiming The Petition Clause, Christina E. Wells

Faculty Publications

This essay, a short book review of Ronald Krotoszynski Jr.'s book, Reclaiming the Petition Clause Seditious Libel, "Offensive" Protest, and the Right to Petition the Government for Redress of Grievances, examines the variety of restrictions that actually affect protestors in the modern landscape. Professor Krotoszynski effectively argues that the Supreme Court's current use of content neutral time place and manner restrictions allows government officials to engage in surreptitious content censorship and also revives the defunct crime of seditious libel. His proposal to locate protestors' rights in the petition clause of the First Amendment is both historically grounded and attempts to …

Public Forum 2.1: Public Higher Education Institutions And Social Media, Robert H. Jerry Ii, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

Public colleges and universities increasingly are using Facebook, Second Life, YouTube, Twitter, and other social media communications tools. Yet public colleges and universities are government actors, and their creation and maintenance of social media sites or forums create difficult constitutional and administrative challenges. Our separate experiences, both theoretical and practical, have convinced us of the value of providing guidance for public higher education institutions wishing to engage with their constituents-including prospective, current, and former students and many others-through social media.

Together, we seek to guide public university officials through the complex body of law governing their social media use and …

Not A Free Press Court?, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

The last decade has been tumultuous for print and broadcast media. Daily newspaper circulation continues to fall precipitously, magazines struggle to survive, and network television audiences keep shrinking. In the meanwhile, cable news is prospering, mobile devices are contributing to increased news consumption, and many new media outlets appear to be thriving. Despite the dynamism in the media industry, the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts has taken up relatively few First Amendment cases directly involving the media. The Court has addressed a number of important free speech cases since 2005, but thus far the only Roberts Court decisions …

Incendiary Speech And Social Media, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

Incidents illustrating the incendiary capacity of social media have rekindled concerns about the "mismatch" between existing doctrinal categories and new types of dangerous speech. This Essay examines two such incidents, one in which an offensive tweet and YouTube video led a hostile audience to riot and murder, and the other in which a blogger urged his nameless, faceless audience to murder federal judges. One incident resulted in liability for the speaker even though no violence occurred; the other did not lead to liability for the speaker even though at least thirty people died as a result of his words. An …

Religious Freedom, Church-State Separation, & The Ministerial Exception, Carl H. Esbeck, Thomas C. Berg, Kimberlee Wood Colby, Richard W. Garnett

Faculty Publications

The Hosanna-Tabor case concerns the separation of church and state, an arrangement that is often misunderstood but is nevertheless a critical dimension of the freedom of religion protected by the First Amendment to our Constitution. For nearly a thousand years, the tradition of Western constitutionalism - the project of protecting political freedom by marking boundaries to the power of government - has been assisted by the principled commitment to religious liberty and to church-state separation, correctly understood. A community that respects - as ours does - both the importance of, and the distinction between, the spheres of political and religious …

Nobody's Fools: The Rational Audience As First Amendment Ideal, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

Assumptions about audiences shape the outcomes of First Amendment cases. Yet the Supreme Court rarely specifies what its assumptions about audiences are, much less attempts to justify them. Drawing on literary theory, this Article identifies and defends two critical assumptions that emerge from First Amendment cases involving so-called "core" speech. The first is that audiences are capable of rationally assessing the truth, quality, and credibility of core speech. The second is that more speech is generally preferable to less. These assumptions, which I refer to collectively as the rational audience model, lie at the heart of the "marketplace of ideas" …

Anonymity In Cyberspace: What Can We Learn From John Doe?, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

This Article examines the evolution of the law governing libel suits against anonymous “John Doe” defendants based on Internet speech. Between 1999 and 2009, courts crafted new First Amendment doctrines to protect Internet speakers from having their anonymity automatically stripped away upon the filing of a libel action. Courts also adapted existing First Amendment protections for hyperbole, satire and other non-factual speech to protect the distinctive discourse of Internet message boards. Despite these positive developments, the current state of the law is unsatisfactory. Because the scope of protection for anonymous Internet speech varies greatly by jurisdiction, resourceful plaintiffs can make …

Where's The Harm?: Free Speech And The Regulation Of Lies, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment to accord a measure of protection to outright lies. This essay seeks to explain why. Using Holocaust denial as an example of verifiably false speech, this essay poses the question of whether such speech poses a more serious danger than First Amendment jurisprudence traditionally has acknowledged. This essay also probes the unintended consequences of governmental attempts to impose criminal punishment on lies.

Medium-Specific Regulation Of Attorney Advertising: A Critique, Lyrissa Lidsky, Tera Peterson

Faculty Publications

Florida has been one of the most aggressive states in regulating attorney advertising. The Florida Supreme Court recently adopted new and more stringent rules regulating broadcast advertising by attorneys, and the court appears poised to adopt new and more stringent rules governing Internet advertising by attorneys. As this Article details, the problem is that Florida's new and proposed rules violate both the First Amendment and sound public policy principles. This Article provides guidance to states contemplating further regulation of attorney advertising, and it indirectly critiques current commercial speech doctrine.

Brandenburg And The United States War On Incitement Abroad: Defending A Double Standard, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

While it is perfectly legitimate for the United States to attempt to persuade foreign citizens and media not to engage in advocacy of violent acts, the administration's rhetoric suggests that the United States expects foreign governments to take action against speech that would be protected by the First Amendment in the United States. What explains this apparent hypocrisy? Is this simply another example of the United States touting democracy at home while supporting despotism abroad? Or is the Brandenburg incitement standard so socially and culturally contingent that it is not appropriate for export, at least to the Arab Middle East? …

Expiating The Sins Of Yoder And Smith: Toward A Unified Theory Of First Amendment Exemptions From Neutral Laws Of General Applicability, Brian A. Freeman

Missouri Law Review

This Article explores the extent to which the Constitution requires exemptions from neutral laws of general applicability in order to protect the free exercise of religion. Part I sets forth the current Supreme Court jurisprudence in this area, focusing on the most recent cases, which suggest that only laws that are not neutral or generally applicable are subject to strict scrutiny; otherwise, the majority believes that neutral generally applicable laws are subject to rational basis review. Part I also includes a discussion of analogous First Amendment freedom of expression cases, especially the “expressive conduct” cases, in which the court uses …

Prying, Spying And Lying: Intrusive Newsgather And What The Law Should Do About Them, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

The media's use of intrusive newsgathering techniques poses an increasing threat to individual privacy. Courts currently resolve the overwhelming majority of conflicts in favor of the media. This is not because the First Amendment bars the imposition of tort liability on the media for its newsgathering practices. It does not. Rather, tort law has failed to seize the opportunity to create meaninful privacy protection. After surveying the economic, philosophical, and practical obstacles to reform, this Article proposes to rejuvenate the tort of intrusion to tip the balance between privacy and the press back in privacy's direction. Working within the framework …

Personal Jurisdiction Based On Advertising: The First Amendment And Federal Liberty Issues, Keith H. Beyler

Missouri Law Review

Part I of this Article illustrates the potential impact of treating advertising as a basis for personal jurisdiction by looking at how such treatment might deter interstate advertising by abortion providers. Parts II and III examine whether advertising is a basis for personal jurisdiction under the current requirements and ground rules for personal jurisdiction laid down by the Supreme Court. Parts IV and V examine First Amendment and federalism arguments for treating advertising as an insufficient basis for personal jurisdiction.

You Have The Right To Criticize This Casenote: Protecting Negative Reviews Within The Law Of Defamation And The First Amendment, David C. Vogel

Missouri Law Review

In Moldea v. New York Times Co., the District of Columbia Court of Appeals attempted to determine under what circumstances a statement labeled as opinion may be the basis for a defamation suit. The court approached the topic with some difficulty, as the United States Supreme Court's 1990 decision in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. had created confusion in lower courts over not only the validity of several traditional tests used to distinguish between fact and opinion, but also as to whether placing statements in an opinion context provides them with blanket protection from liability, regardless of their content. The …

First Amendment And Private Property: A Sign For Free Speech, The, Anthony J. Durone, Melissa K. Smith

Missouri Law Review

Freedom of speech is one of the best known of all the constitutional rights protected by the Bill of Rights. Freedom of speech has received special attention from the courts for at least three reasons: (1) it is essential to the political process that is the foundation of our democracy;3 (2) it is fundamentally important to the discovery of truth in the free marketplace of ideas;4 and (3) it is an end in itself in a free country. In furtherance of a substantial interest, however, the freedom of speech falls subject to the police power of the state. In City …

Civil Rico, Protesters, And The First Amendment: A Constitutional Combination, Timothy S. Millman

Missouri Law Review

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO") provides for both government causes of action and a private cause of action. The private cause of action is usually referred to as civil RICO In recent years, abortion clinics and other groups have used civil RICO in suits against violent protesters. The circuits had disagreed, however, on whether RICO requires the defendant to be economically motivated. The circuits had disagreed, however, on whether RICO. Therefore, abortion clinics and other potential plaintiffs were uncertain whether civil RICO was a viable option in suits against politically or religiously motivated protesters. Although the Court …

Anonymous Campaign Literature And The First Amendment, Erika Lietzan

Faculty Publications

Presently, forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have statutes that require the disclosure of some party's identity (for example, an author or a sponsor) on political literature pertaining to elections. The most common explanations given for these statutes are that they deter fraud and libel in the election arena and that they provide valuable information to the voters. Because these statutes regulate core political speech, however, they necessarily implicate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Although campaign disclosure laws have been both struck down and sustained by state courts reviewing appealed convictions, the decisions have been disappointingly …