Communications Law Commons^™

Policing Hate Speech And Extremism: A Taxonomy Of Arguments In Opposition, Leonard M. Niehoff

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Hate speech and extremist association do real and substantial harm to individuals, groups, and our society as a whole. Our common sense, experience, and empathy for the targets of extremism tell us that our laws should do more to address this issue. Current reform efforts have therefore sought to revise our laws to do a better job at policing, prohibiting, and punishing hate speech and extremist association.

Efforts to do so, however, encounter numerous and substantial challenges. We can divide them into three general categories: definitional problems, operational problems, and conscientious problems. An informed understanding of these three categories of …

You Can’T Say That!: Public Forum Doctrine And Viewpoint Discrimination In The Social Media Era, Micah Telegen

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The growing prevalence of privately-owned social media platforms is changing the way Americans and their governments communicate. This shift offers new opportunities, but also requires a reinterpretation of the First Amendment’s proscription of government limitations of speech. The public forum doctrine and its proscription of viewpoint discrimination seem particularly stretched by the digital revolution and the development of social media. In ongoing cases, litigants and courts have invoked the doctrine to limit the government’s ability to ‘block’ those who comment critically on government pages—much to the chagrin of those who note the private status of the companies hosting the pages …

In All Fairness: Using Political Broadcast Access Doctrine To Tailor Public Campaign Fund Matching, Andrew V. Moshirnia, Aaron T. Dozeman

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Recent United States Supreme Court decisions have undermined the viability of campaign public financing systems, a vital tool for fighting political corruption. First, Citizens United v. FEC allowed privately financed candidates and independent groups to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaigning. Publicly financed candidates now risk being vastly outspent. Second, Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom PAC v. Bennett invalidated a proportional fund matching system whereby privately financed candidates’ or independent groups’ spending triggered funds to publicly funded candidates. These decisions effectuate a libertarian speech doctrine: all speakers, individual or corporate, must be absolutely unburdened. To comply with this approach, …

Exploring The First Amendment Rights Of Teens In Relationship To Sexting And Censorship, Julia Halloran Mclaughlin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article explores child pornography law in relation to teen sexting conduct. Recently, some teens who engaged in teen sexting have been convicted under child pornography laws and have been required to register as sexual predators. The criminalization of teens for developmentally typical behavior, mimicking the conduct of adults, can result in grave harm to most teens. Furthermore, the application of child pornography laws to teen sexting conduct demonstrates the constitutional overbreadth of the current definition of child pornography. Photographs have an emblematic role in society-capturing and celebrating youth. Moreover, the creation of teen sexting images accompanies a teen's developmental …

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 …

Long Live The Lie Bill!, Lucila I. Van Dam

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

What successful defamation plaintiffs typically desire and doctrinally deserve is to have their reputations restored. Presently, however, a plaintiff who has established that she was defamed by the defendant is entitled only to an award of damages, which does nothing to restore reputation. This Note proposes that in addition to a damages award, courts-- if they are to take seriously their obligation to compensate the plaintiff-- should order the defendant to retract the defamatory statement. Contrary to the prevailing view, this Note argues that the proposed retraction order does not jeopardize the First Amendment guarantee of free expression.

Who's Talking? Disentangling Government And Private Speech, Leslie Gielow Jacobs

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Several different constitutional rules apply to government actions that influence the content of speech. The government has far more discretion to determine speech content when the government itself is the speaker than when it regulates private speakers. Specifically, in the former circumstance, the government can discriminate according to viewpoint, whereas in the latter circumstance it cannot. While the application of the rules may be obvious when either the government or private entities speak alone, increasingly, through various different types of interactions, government and private groups or individuals are speaking together. This circumstance complicates the crucial constitutional determination, which is: who's …

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 …

Regulation Of Indecency In Political Broadcasting, Jonathan Golomb

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The article considers both the constitutional and statutory aspects of the regulation of indecency in political broadcasting. The discussion is limited to considering "indecency," a term excluding obscenity or incitement to violence, because the government's power to regulate these types of speech is well established. Indecent speech would be protected if used in the print media, since it does not fall within the established First Amendment exceptions. The basic constitutional question, therefore, is whether the broadcast media are inherently different from the print media, so as to justify different treatment of indecent political speech. This article will contend that they …

Drug Songs And The Federal Communications Commission, Sammuel Bufford

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A "public notice" concerning the broadcasting of drug-related popular songs by radio stations issued from the Federal Communications Commission on March 5, 1971. While this notice could be generally taken to prohibit the playing of such songs, its actual message, upon further analysis, is more complex and less direct. This article will examine the notice to ascertain its likely meaning, determine its legal status, and examine three constitutional issues it raises: whether the songs are protected as speech under the first amendment; whether the statement of the prohibition (if that be the import of the notice) is sufficiently precise to …