Law Commons^™

Why The Actual Malice Test Should Be Eliminated, John M. Kang

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Connick/Garcetti Split: Is Public Employee Association A Matter Of Public Concern?, Austin J. Wishart

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lane V. Franks: The Supreme Court Clarifies Public Employees’ Free Speech Rights, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Thomas A. Schweitzer

No abstract provided.

Lane V. Franks: The Supreme Court Clarifies Public Employees’ Free Speech Rights, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

First Amendment Cases In The October 2004 Term, Joel M. Gora

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, New York County, People V. Smith, Jessica Miller

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Slides: Best Management Practices For Oil And Gas Development And Comparative Water Quality Database Of Regulations Relating To Shale Oil And Gas, Matt Samelson, University Of Colorado Boulder. Getches-Wilkinson Center For Natural Resources, Energy, And The Environment. Intermountain Oil And Gas Bmp Project

Fracking, Water Quality and Public Health: Examining Current Laws and Regulations (March 20)

Presenter: Matt Samelson, J.D., Attorney, Consultant for Intermountain Oil and Gas Best Management Practices (BMP) Project, Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy and the Environment, University of Colorado Law School

34 slides

What's It To You: The First Amendment And Matters Of Public Concern , Mark Strasser

Missouri Law Review

This Article traces the development of the “matters of public concern” doctrine, explaining the role that the concept has played in cases ranging from defamation3 to employment termination to publication of (allegedly) private facts.4 The Article discusses various inconsistencies in the Court’s jurisprudence, both with respect to what counts as a matter of public concern5 and with respect to the relative importance of the protection of such matters. 6 It concludes that the current jurisprudence cannot help but cause confusion and inconsistent results in the lower courts and must be clarified at the earliest opportunity. 7

A Family Affair? Domestic Relations And Involuntary Public Figure Status, Mark Strasser

Mark Strasser

The constitutional limitations on defamation damages have changed greatly over the past five decades. Initially, only statements about public officials triggered such limitations, but the class of individuals triggering the most demanding standard was subsequently expanded. Over the past half century, members of the Court could neither agree about the kinds of people nor the kinds of statements that should be afforded constitutional protection. Even when ostensibly agreeing about the criteria to be used in defamation cases, members of the Court disagreed greatly about how the announced criteria should be applied in practice.

One of the most doctrinally confusing aspects …

Whistleblowing, Public Employees, And The First Amendment, Mark Strasser

Mark Strasser

Recent revelations of extensive public wrongdoing illustrate the need for whistleblower protection so that governmental wrongdoing is more likely to come to light. While there is some statutory protection of whistleblowing as long as certain conditions have been met, a separate issue is the degree to which the Constitution protects whistleblowers under the First Amendment. Ironically, the constitutional protections for whistleblowers have decreased over the past several decades, leaving an impoverished system of protection for discussions of great public interest. This article analyzes the respects in which First Amendment protections for matters of great public import were once fairly robust …

What’S It To You: The First Amendment And Matters Of Public Concern, Mark Strasser

Mark Strasser

In Snyder v. Phelps, the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed that the First Amendment protects discussions on matters of public concern, thereby underscoring the importance of the distinction between matters of public concern and matters of mere private interest. Yet, the Court has never offered clear criteria by which to determine which speech falls into one category and which falls into the other. This article traces the development of the “matters of public concern” doctrine, explaining the role that the concept has played in cases ranging from defamation to employment termination to publication of (allegedly) private facts. The current jurisprudence …

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 …

Not A Free Press Court?, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky

UF Law 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 …

Funeral Protests, Privacy, And The Constitution: What Is Next After Phelps?, Mark Strasser

Mark Strasser

In Snyder v. Phelps, the United States Supreme Court struck down a damages award against Reverend Fred Phelps Sr. and the Westboro Baptist Church for picketing a funeral. In a relatively short opinion, the Court suggested that the legal issues were straightforward—the First Amendment precludes the imposition of tort damages when the comments at issue involve matters of public concern. Yet, the Court failed to explain whether those comments that were not of public concern were somehow immunized by those that were, and also failed to explain how the holding fits into the current defamation and privacy jurisprudence. The opinion …

The Constitutional Status Of Speech About Oneself, R. George Wright

Cleveland State Law Review

We have accepted above the well-established idea that speech about oneself that is also intended to convey some sort of political idea or to address some matter of public concern can typically be distinguished from speech about oneself with no such further intent. On this basis, we have argued, contrary to recent contentions, that the latter sort of speech-speech that is "merely" about the self, or about one's merely personal or private concerns-should not generally qualify for any sort of elevated free speech protection. Fundamentally, this is because such speech does not systematically promote any of the consensually recognized and …

Speech Of Government Employees, Ann C. Hodges

Law Faculty Publications

For many years, government employment was considered a privilege rather than a right, and, as a result, the government could place restrictions on employee speech that would be unconstitutional if applied to citizens.

The Virtues Of Knowing Less: Justifying Privacy Protections Against Disclosure, Daniel J. Solove

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

This Article develops justifications for protections against the disclosure of private information. An extensive body of scholarship has attacked such protections as anathema to the Information Age, where the free flow of information is championed as a fundamental value. This Article responds to two general critiques of disclosure protections: (1) that they inhibit freedom of speech, and (2) that they restrict information useful for judging others.

Regarding the free speech critique, the Article argues that not all speech is of equal value; speech of private concern is less valuable than speech of public concern. The difficulty, however, is distinguishing between …

Concluding Comments, Mark Pearson

Coalbed Methane Development in the Intermountain West (April 4-5)

3 pages.

The "Ultimate Question": A Limited Argument For Trafficking In Stolen Speech, Matthew J. Coleman

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Concern With Public Concern: Toward A Better Definition Of The "Pickering / Connick" Threshold Test, Karin B. Hoppmann

Vanderbilt Law Review

The term "public employer" is something of a legal oxymoron. Although the law has established a jurisprudence for the employer, consisting of a network of state and federal statutory requirements,' and a jurisprudence for the governmental body, governed by the Constitution, the public employer belongs to neither of these. It is an entity that functions as a private business, charged with maintaining an efficient and productive workplace. It is constantly under pres- sure to improve performance, and it is just as concerned with discipline, morale, and efficiency as any private employer. Yet it is also part of the sovereign and …

Section 1983 Litigation, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Growth Management In The 1980s: A New Consensus And A Change Of Strategy, Susan M. Sinclair

New England Journal of Public Policy

After a decade of relative silence on the issue of land use planning, legislatures in several states are reassessing the relative roles of state and local governments in the management of growth and development. When state governments first addressed the land use issue in the late 1960s and the early 1970s, environmental concerns dominated the debate. During this period a number of states established regulatory mechanisms for bringing certain kinds of development under state review. During the late 1970s and early 1980s there was a hiatus in state-level activity on land use issues. Since 1985, however, the issue has reemerged …

Freedom Of Speech In The Public Workplace: A Comment On The Public Concern Requirement, Cynthia Lee

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

In the twenty years since the Pickering test, the U.S. Supreme Court has done little to clarify what types of public employee speech constitute speech "of public concern" for the purpose of receiving constitutional protection. In this Comment, Cynthia Lee offers a reformulation of the Pickering test by focusing on three factors courts should examine when determining whether an employee who engages in disruptive speech should receive constitutional protection. Part One of this Comment traces the historical background of public employee free speech rights. Part Two examines the employee's initial hurdle of showing that his or her speech was of …

The Law Of Wildlife Protection In The United States, David H. Getches

Proceedings of the Sino-American Conference on Environmental Law (August 16)

27 pages.

Contains 12 pages of endnotes.

Environmental Law: New Legal Concepts In The Antipollution Fight , Patrick E. Murphy

Missouri Law Review

Until quite recently it has been the accepted view that one of man's chief functions was to control and to exploit his environment. Only within the last year have most Americans begun to realize that we do not possess an inexhaustible supply of natural resources; that in fact the quality of man's life is threatened and perhaps his very existence. This public concern for the quality of our environment is beginning to be felt in the courtroom. Private citizens have attempted to preserve the livability of this country by bringing legal action against the federal government, the states, and private …