Law Commons^™

John Stuart Mill And Political Correctness, Lackland H. Bloom Jr.

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article will examine Mill’s arguments in favor of unrestrained freedom of speech and his objection to the social censorship of speech. It will then discuss the origins and impact of what is now characterized as political correctness. The article will then define the concept of social censorship and attempt to distinguish pure social censorship from private tangible punishment of speech. Next, the article will examine the ways in which social censorship serves important social goals and promotes free speech as well as the ways in which it undermines free speech. It will especially focus on the damage to intellectual …

Justifying Perceptions In First And Second Amendment Doctrine, Eric Ruben

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Public perceptions often motivate policymakers. But what is the role of perceptions in defending regulations challenged as violating constitutional rights? This article explores how First and Second Amendment doctrine answer that question.

First Amendment free speech doctrine deploys categorical rules and balancing tests to determine the constitutionality of speech restrictions seeking to shape various perceptions. The resulting discrepancies, the article contends, can be explained by motive-based theories of First Amendment doctrine.

In the Second Amendment context, how to handle perception-based regulations remains an open question. Some courts have held that firearm restrictions can pass muster if they preserve the public’s …

Can The Irs Silence Religious Organizations, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In the years following the 2004 presidential election, the Los Angeles Times reported that the Internal Revenue Service threatened revoking the tax-exempt status of the All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena because during a 2004 sermon, a church rector stated that he opposed the Vietnam and Gulf wars and that Jesus would have disapproved of the Bush Administration's preemptive war doctrine. The rector did not tell his parishioners who to support in the 2004 election, however. This threat of revoking an organization's tax-exempt status is just one example of the IRS's recent and unprecedented aggressiveness in seeking out violations of …

Institutional Review Boards, Regulatory Incentives, And Some Modest Proposals For Reform, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

It is time to rethink the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in approving social science research. While most law professors conduct their research in an almost unregulated environment - pouring through cases, statutes, and each other's articles, all without the kind of human interaction subject to IRB regulation - their colleagues elsewhere in the university have been coping for decades with an increasingly intrusive bureaucracy that sometimes undermines basic academic values. Three things seem very clear. First, there are a lot of IRBs - at least 4,000 - and their numbers are growing. Second, they have recently "increased their …

The Antipaternalism Principle In The First Amendment, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Commentators generally agree the First Amendment is hostile to paternalism. Yet, most analysts invoke the idea of free speech antipaternalism without examining its roots, explaining what it means, or discussing what it entails. There has been no attempt to identify and to explain the antipaternalism principle across a variety of free speech domains. This Article examines the nature and reach of this particular brand of First Amendment exceptionalism.

In Part I the author reviews First Amendment jurisprudence where the Supreme Court evinces, either explicitly or implicitly, some aversion to paternalism. This review covers several free speech frontiers, including commercial speech, …

Nea V. Finley: A Decision In Search Of A Rationale, Lackland H. Bloom Jr.

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Debate has raged over whether Congress can constitutionally restrict, or at least influence, the ability of the National Endowment for the Arts (“NEA”) to award grants to artists and institutions for the creation or display of art work that a significant segment of the public would consider highly offensive. In the October 1997 Term, the Supreme Court, by an 8-1 margin in NEA v. Finley, upheld section 954(d), a 1991 congressional amendment to the NEA Act that requires the Chairperson of the NEA to ensure that, in establishing regulations and procedures for assessing artistic excellence and artistic merit, “general standards …