First Amendment Commons^™

Regulating Social Media Through Family Law, Katharine B. Silbaugh, Adi Caplan-Bricker

Faculty Scholarship

Social media afflicts minors with depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, addiction, suicidality, and eating disorders. States are legislating at a breakneck pace to protect children. Courts strike down every attempt to intervene on First Amendment grounds. This Article clears a path through this stalemate by leveraging two underappreciated frameworks: the latent regulatory power of parental authority arising out of family law, and a hidden family law within First Amendment jurisprudence. These two projects yield novel insights. First, the recent cases offer a dangerous understanding of the First Amendment, one that should not survive the family law reasoning we provide. First Amendment jurisprudence …

Child Entertainers And Their Limited Protections: A Call For An Interstate Compact, Tabetha Bennett

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Small-Er Screen: Youtube Vlogging And The Unequipped Child Entertainment Labor Laws, Amanda G. Riggio

Seattle University Law Review

Family vloggers are among the millions of content creators on YouTube. In general, vloggers frequently upload recorded videos of their daily lives. Family vloggers are unique because they focus their content around their familial relationships and the lives of their children. One set of family vloggers, the Ace Family, has recorded their children’s lives from the day they were born and continue to upload videos of each milestone, including “Elle Cries on Her First Rollercoaster Ride” and “Elle and Alaïa Get Caught Doing What!! **Hidden Camera**.” Another vlogging couple, Cole and Savannah LaBrant, post similar content, including videos titled “Baby …

The High Price Of Poverty: A Study Of How The Majority Of Current Court System Procedures For Collecting Court Costs And Fees, As Well As Fines, Have Failed To Adhere To Established Precedent And The Constitutional Guarantees They Advocate., Trevor J. Calligan

Trevor J Calligan

No abstract provided.

Www.Obscenity.Com: An Analysis Of Obscenity And Indecency Regulation Of The Internet, Kelly M. Doherty

Akron Law Review

This comment explores the constitutionality of federal regulations as applied to Internet content and alternatives to government regulation. Part II provides background on the Internet, First Amendment obscenity and indecency law as applied to communications media, and past and current legislation enacted to regulate Internet content. Part III analyzes the constitutionality of COPA, and discusses why other alternatives are more effective and preferable to government regulation. Part IV concludes that protecting children from harmful Internet content is the responsibility of parents, and therefore, Internet regulation should begin at home.

United States V. American Library Association: The Choice Between Cash And Constitutional Rights, Barbara A. Sanchez

Akron Law Review

This Note discusses the possibility that the Court, in its eagerness to protect children, twisted established First Amendment doctrines to uphold CIPA and declined to address other legal issues that weaken CIPA’s constitutionality. Part II provides a historical background of previous legislation attempting to protect children accessing the Internet, explains what CIPA is and compares it to previous legislation, and also discusses current filtering technology and its limitations. Part III provides a statement of the facts, including the procedural history of the case. Part IV analyzes the Court’s confusing and inconsistent application of firmly established rules dealing with Congress’ spending …

Omnipresent Student Speech And The Schoolhouse Gate: Interpreting Tinker In The Digital Age, Watt L. Black Jr.

Watt Lesley Black Jr.

This paper focuses primarily on federal circuit level decisions regarding public school district's ability to discipline students who engage in electronic speech while off-campus and not involved in school activities. Particular attention is paid to the question of whether and how appeals courts have been willing to apply the "material and substantial disruption" standard from the Supreme Court's 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines decision to speech occurring off-campus. The paper, which is targeted toward both legal scholars and school administrators, draws together the common threads from the various circuits and weaves them into a set of guidelines for school administrators …

Homeschooling As A Constitutional Right: A Claim Under A Close Look At Meyer And Pierce And The Lochner-Based Assumptions They Made About State Regulatory Power, David M. Wagner

David N. Wagner

In 2012, a German family of would-be homeschoolers, the Romeikes, fled to the U.S. to escape fines and child removal for this practice, which has been illegal in Germany since 1938. The Sixth Circuit, in denying their asylum request, conspicuously did not slam the door on the possibility that if the Romeikes were U.S. citizens, they might have a right to homeschool. This article takes up that question, and argues that Meyer and Pierce, the classic cases constitutionalizing the right to use private schools, point beyond those holdings towards a right to homeschool; and that the permissible state regulations on …

An Imminent Substantial Disruption: Towards A Uniform Standard For Balancing The Rights Of Students To Speak And The Rights Of Administrators To Discipline., Allison G. Kort

Allison G Kort

ABSTRACT An Imminent Substantial Disruption: Toward a Uniform Standard for Balancing the Rights of Students to Speak and the Rights of Administrators to Discipline. By Allison Kort Twenty-five years before the Supreme Court’s landmark school speech decision in Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503, 504 (1969), the Court cautioned against placing too much discretion in the hands of school boards. In Tinker, when students wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, the Supreme Court determined that student speech may not be censored when the record demonstrates no facts which would reasonably have led school authorities to forecast a …

When The Classroom Is Not In The Schoolhouse: Applying Tinker To Student Speech At Online Schools, Brett T. Macintyre

Seattle University Law Review

Despite the overwhelming increase in students’ Internet use and the growing popularity of online public schools, the United States Supreme Court has never addressed how, or if, schools can discipline students for disruptive online speech without violating the students’ First Amendment rights. What the Supreme Court has addressed is how school administrators can constitutionally discipline students within traditional schools. In a landmark decision, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court announced the now famous principle that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” Still, the Court …

Dancing Around Equality: Public Schools And Prejudice At The Prom, Jeffrey S. Thomas

Jeffrey S. Thomas

No abstract provided.

Testing The Social Media Waters - First Amendment Entanglement Beyond The Schoolhouse Gates, Lily M. Strumwasser

Lily M Strumwasser

Dear Editor:

I am a third-year student at The John Marshall Law School in Chicago, Illinois, where I serve as the executive student publications editor of The John Marshall Law Review. In September 2013, I will work as an associate at Seyfarth Shaw in its labor and employment practice group. I am writing to submit my article, "Testing The Social Media Waters - First Amendment Entanglement Beyond The Schoolhouse Gates" My article considers the contours of student free speech rights within the context of public schools. I think and hope you will find it to be interesting and …

Allocating The Costs Of Parental Free Exercise: Striking A New Balance Between Sincere Religious Belief And A Child's Right To Medical Treatment , Paul A. Monopoli

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Disentangling Symmetries: Speech, Association, Parenthood, Laurence H. Tribe

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Power Of The Parental Trump Card: How And Why Frazier V. Winn Got It Right, Jocelyn Floyd

Chicago-Kent Law Review

When two fundamental rights are in conflict, such that the protection of one requires the infringement of the other, courts must weigh those rights against each other to determine which is ultimately greater. In Frazier v. Winn, the Eleventh Circuit dealt with precisely such an issue: specifically, the rights of parents pitted against those of their children. This note explores the history of both parental rights and student's rights in school to show why the court appropriately affirmed that children's right to free speech is only as expansive as their parents allow, justified by the parents' fundamental right to …

The Speech-Enhancing Effect Of Internet Regulation, Emily Buss

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In this Article, the author suggests that certain speech-reducing regulations will, in fact, be speech-enhancing for children. This is because children are vulnerable to far greater censorship at the hands of their parents than at the hands of Internet regulators. Regulations that inspire parents to relax their grip on their children's access to information are likely to produce significant net speech gains for children. Viewed this way, regulations designed to protect children can be conceived as pitting the speech interests of adults against the speech interests of children. The Article suggests a number of reasons we might value the children's …

When Well-Being Trumps Liberty: Political Theory, Jurisprudence, And Children's Rights, William Galston

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Compared to most adults, children are dependent and vulnerable and therefore require special protection. Efforts to safeguard their well-being often collide with one or more of the liberty guarantees of the First Amendment. Professor Etzioni fears that current jurisprudence has tipped the balance too far towards individual liberty, making it difficult to extend children the legal protection they need. Drawing on a theoretical account of constitutionalism as well as existing case law, the author argues that mainstream jurisprudence is up to the task of balancing the well-being of children against the liberty of adults. The Supreme Court's recent decision in …

On Protecting Children From Speech, Amitai Etzioni

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Are children entitled to the same First Amendment rights as adults? This Article explores the constitutionality of limiting children's access to objectionable materials assuming that both free speech rights and the protection of children are two core values that, like all other social values, must be balanced. When used to assess specific court cases and public policies, the balancing principle is a helpful guide in determining whether voluntary or incentives-based programs are sufficient to remedy the problems at hand or whether government regulation of free speech is necessary. The Article analyzes five court cases involving Internet filters in libraries, the …

Shielding Children: The European Way, Michael D. Birnhack, Jacob H. Rowbottom

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The Internet crosses physical borders, and carries with it both its promises and its harms to many different countries and societies. These countries thus share the same technology, but they do not necessarily share the same set of values or legal system. This Article compares the legal response in the United States and in Europe to one important issue: the exposure of children to certain materials, which are deemed harmful to them but not harmful to adults.

This US-European comparison, in which the experience in the United Kingdom serves as a leading example, illustrates the traits of various kinds of …

The Need For A Two (Or More) Tiered First Amendment To Provide For The Protection Of Children, Kevin W. Saunders

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article addresses the two sorts of problems raised by Professor Etzioni, while also responding to the earlier articles in this Symposium. With regard to the spillover effect, the author argues that there are ways to limit the effect on adults of restrictions designed to protect children, even on the Internet. Furthermore, some spillover effect is allowed and may leave open the possibility of protecting children from tobacco or alcohol advertisements. The Article also addresses areas in which material has been seen as protected even for children. While agreeing that depictions of violence pose an important problem, the Article also …

Response, Amitai Etzioni

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Toward A Constitutional Regulation Of Minors' Access To Harmful Internet Speech, Dawn C. Nunziato

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In this Article, Prof. Nunziato scrutinizes Congress's recent efforts to regulate access to sexually-themed Internet speech. The first such effort, embodied in the Communications Decency Act, failed to take into account the Supreme Court's carefully-honed obscenity and obscenity-for-minors jurisprudence. The second, embodied in the Child Online Protection Act, attended carefully to Supreme Court precedent, but failed to account for the geographic variability in definitions of obscene speech. Finally, the recently-enacted Children's Internet Protection Act apparently remedies the constitutional deficiencies identified in these two prior legislative efforts, but runs the risk of being implemented in a manner that fails to protect …

The Liberal Theory Of Freedom Of Expression For Children, Colin M. Macleod

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article develops a liberal theory of freedom of expression which is sensitive to the interests of children as distinct, vulnerable but developing members of society. I argue that children have, in addition to welfare interests, interests in the development and exercise of basic moral powers. In virtue of such interests, children acquire, well before they become adults, nontrivial rights of free expression. Respecting children's rights to free expression entails limits on the prerogatives of parents and others to determine the sorts of cultural materials children should be permitted access. Nonetheless children's rights are importantly different from those of adults. …

Free Speech And Children's Interests, David Archard

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This Article endorses the conclusion of Etzioni's article that the First Amendment right of free speech should not trump the interests of children. However the picture is more complicated once we recognize that parents have a "basic" right to bring up their children as they see fit that may conflict with the state's duty to protect children in its jurisdiction.

Moreover there is an important difference between protecting children now from harms and safeguarding the interests of the adults they will grow into. Society has an interest in protecting children based upon its fundamental interest in ensuring the conditions of …

On Protecting Children—From Censorship: A Reply To Amitai Etzioni, Marjorie Heins

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Etzioni's argument for censorship of minors ignores the fundamental problem with Internet filters, misstates the results of media-effects research, and uses emotional terms like "protection" and "harm" to mask moral judgments about what is appropriate for youth.

Given the size and constantly changing character of the Internet, filters necessarily rely on key words and phrases. As a result, thousands of valuable Web pages are mistakenly blocked by filters, even at their narrowest settings. The problem is inherent in the system.

Most media-effects studies do not show a causal link between violent content and violent (or "aggressive") behavior. The studies that …

The U.S. Supreme Court Addresses The Child Pornography Prevention Act And Child Online Protection Act In Ashcroft V. Free Speech Coalition And Ashcroft V. American Civil Liberties Union, Sue Ann Mota

Federal Communications Law Journal

Both the Child Pornography Prevention Act ("CPPA") and the Child Online Protection Act ("COPA") were intended by Congress to protect minors. The CPPA was intended to protect minors from the harmful effects of virtual child pornography. The COPA was intended to protect minors from pornography currently available commercially on the World Wide Web. However, in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of both statutes: The Court struck down sections of the CPPA as overbroad and unconstitutional in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. In Ashcroft v. ACLU, the Court upheld some sections of COPA as not unconstitutionally overbroad, but …

The First Amendment, Children, The Internet, And America's Public Libraries, Fred H. Cate

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Essay--Fighting For Their Lives: The Applicability Of The Fairness Doctrine To Violence In Children's Television Programming, Thomas Barton

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.