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

Communications Law Commons

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

Education Law

Freedom of speech

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Communications Law

Purpose And Effects: Viewpoint-Discriminatory Closure Of A Designated Public Forum, Kerry L. Monroe Jul 2011

Purpose And Effects: Viewpoint-Discriminatory Closure Of A Designated Public Forum, Kerry L. Monroe

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In early 2010, amidst a series of racially charged incidents on campus, the student government president at the University of California at San Diego revoked funding to all student media organizations in response to controversial speech on the student-run television station. It is well established that once the government has opened a forum, including a "metaphysical" forum constituted by government funding for private speech, it may not discriminate based on the viewpoints expressed within that forum. However, it has not been clearly established whether the government may close such a forum for a viewpoint-discriminatory purpose. This Note argues that courts …


Protecting The Free Speech Rights Of Insurgent Teachers' Unions: Evaluating The Constitutionality Of Exclusive Access To School Communications Facilities, Stephen E. Woodbury Apr 1982

Protecting The Free Speech Rights Of Insurgent Teachers' Unions: Evaluating The Constitutionality Of Exclusive Access To School Communications Facilities, Stephen E. Woodbury

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I examines the traditional and limited public forum doctrines designed to guarantee speakers a right of access to public places, and finds these theories inadequate in the school union setting. Part II explores a recent addition to the free speech/equal protection analysis: the content neutrality doctrine. This doctrine mandates that when a school board allows one union to express its viewpoints, a duty is created to provide equivalent access to all unions, absent a compelling state interest. Part III reviews several justifications for limiting non-EBA access, and finds most of them without merit and none of them adequate to …