First Amendment Commons^™

Deplatformed: Social Network Censorship, The First Amendment, And The Argument To Amend Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act, John A. Lonigro

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keeping Pace: The U.S. Supreme Court And Evolving Technology, Brian Thomas

Politics Summer Fellows

Contemporary mainstream discussions of the Supreme Court are often qualified with the warning that the nine justices are out of touch with everyday American life, especially when it comes to the newest and most popular technologies. For instance, during oral argument for City of Ontario v. Quon, a 2010 case that dealt with sexting on government-issued devices, Chief Justice John Roberts famously asked what the difference was “between email and a pager,” and Justice Antonin Scalia wondered if the “spicy little conversations” held via text message could be printed and distributed. While these comments have garnered a great deal of …

I Want My Mtv, But Not Your Vh1: A La Carte Cable, Bundling, And The Potential Great Cable Compromise, Holly Phillips

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Fourth Estate And The Third Level: Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. V. Federal Communications Commission—Cable Television And Intermediate Scrutiny, R. Stuart Phillips

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Speech And The Myth Of The Internet As An Unintermediated Experience, Christopher S. Yoo

All Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, a growing number of commentators have raised concerns that the decisions made by Internet intermediaries — including last-mile network providers, search engines, social networking sites, and smartphones — are inhibiting free speech and have called for restrictions on their ability to prioritize or exclude content. Such calls ignore the fact that when mass communications are involved, intermediation helps end users to protect themselves from unwanted content and allows them to sift through the avalanche of desired content that grows ever larger every day. Intermediation also helps solve a number of classic economic problems associated with the Internet. …

The Electronic Media And The Flight From First Amendment Doctrine: Justice Breyer's New Balancing Approach, Jerome A. Barron

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Contemporary First Amendment issues in cases involving the electronic media transcend traditional conflicts between the government and the speaker. The speaker is not easy to identify. Listeners, programmer and medium operators or distributors all have competing claims to First Amendment protection. To determine whose interests shall prevail, courts increasingly seek a methodology that accounts for these warring interests. Justice Breyer, along with Justice Souter and, in some respects, Justice Stevens, have been instrumental in reviving balancing as a First Amendment approach in these situations.

In two recent First Amendment cable television cases Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC (Turner II) …

Authors, Editors, And Uncommon Carriers: Identifying The "Speaker" Within The New Media, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

First Amendment analysis has historically depended on whether a party is a speaker, an editor, or a carrier. With communications technology rapidly evolving, determining which category is appropriate becomes increasingly complex, and ascertaining the First Amendment protections that are applied to various actors in the process of diffusing ideas becomes difficult. This article looks to the historical treatment of the First Amendment rights of speakers, editors, and distributors. This article traces the Supreme Court’s treatment of speech regulations on new technologies, from telegraph and telephone regulations to the seminal Turner Broadcast System, Inc. v. FCC case that created rules for …

The First Amendment And Fcc Rule Making Under The 1992 Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the First Amendment implications of the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) regulations issued under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 19921 (1992 Cable Act). The 1992 Cable Act imposes numerous requirements that are beyond the scope of this Article. This Article analyzes only the FCC's exercise of rule making discretion under the 1992 Cable Act.

Additionally, it must be remembered that an under-staffed FCC was given an enormous amount of work to do within fixed time limits. Therefore, it must be expected that the rulemaking would be vulnerable to second-guessing. Nonetheless, whenever a governmental entity …

Cable Television Rights Of Way: Technology Expands The Concept Of Public Forum, Lawrence E. Spong

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note argues that the public forum analysis is the proper standard for evaluating a cable television company's claim of access to public rights of way. Part I discusses the constitutional basis for this standard. Part II examines the ideological justifications for the public forum doctrine and argues that public rights of way are public forums for cable television purposes. In addition, it explains the application of the public forum doctrine to cable access questions and the doctrine's advantages over other standards.

Cable Tv's "Must Carry" Rules: The Most Restrictive Alternative - Quincy Cable Tv, Inc. V. Fcc, Robert B. Hobbs Jr.

Campbell Law Review

This note first argues that the court correctly applied the least scrutinizing first amendment test to the facts of the case and concluded its inquiry after the rules failed that test. Second, this note argues that the FCC, while once on the correct regulatory path regarding cable, erred by not studying the potential impact of cable television on a case by case basis as the FCC had decided to do with competing broadcasters in Carroll Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC. Third, this note concludes that the Quincy case will benefit cable operators financially and will provide proper protection of cable …

The First Amendment And The Cable Television Operator: An Unprotective Shield Against Public Access Requirements, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article focuses on the question of whether state-imposed public access requirements violate the First Amendment rights of the cable television operator. The author suggests that the appropriate analysis asks whether the law abridges expression the First Amendment was meant to protect. In other words, do cable access requirements abridge speech safeguarded by the First Amendment? The article demonstrates that such requirements do not hinder, but in fact further, fundamental First Amendment interests. Finally, the article shows that access requirements fulfill the standards of the constitutional tests for each classification into which they could be placed.

Broadcasting, The Reluctant Dragon: Will The First Amendment Right Of Access End The Suppressing Of Controversial Ideas?, Donald M. Malone

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The scope of this article will be limited to one aspect of electronic media programming-the extent to which the public is and should be exposed to an accurate cross section of public opinion and a broad range of controversial ideas. Many people, including the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), have acknowledged that a desirable goal for the broadcast media, particularly television, is to provide a marketplace for controversial ideas. Part II of this article will identify the principal reasons why that goal has not been achieved. Part III will examine the fairness doctrine, the antecedents of which have been traced back …