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

First Amendment Commons™

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

Speech

Communications Law

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in First Amendment

Taking Exception To Assessments Of American Exceptionalism: Why The United States Isn’T Such An Outlier On Free Speech, Evelyn Mary Aswad Oct 2021

Taking Exception To Assessments Of American Exceptionalism: Why The United States Isn’T Such An Outlier On Free Speech, Evelyn Mary Aswad

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

One of the most significant challenges to human freedom in the digital age involves the sheer power of private companies over speech and the fact that power is untethered to existing free speech principles. Heated debates are ongoing about what standards social media companies should adopt to regulate speech on their platforms. Some have argued that global social media companies, such as Facebook and Twitter, should align their speech codes with the international human rights law standards of the United Nations (“U.N.”). Others have countered that U.S.-based companies should apply First Amendment standards. Much of this debate is premised on …

Go to article

Can Dna Be Speech?, Jorge R. Roig Dec 2015

Can Dna Be Speech?, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

DNA is generally regarded as the basic building block of life itself. In the most fundamental sense, DNA is nothing more than a chemical compound, albeit a very complex and peculiar one. DNA is an information-carrying molecule. The specific sequence of base pairs contained in a DNA molecule carries with it genetic information, and encodes for the creation of particular proteins. When taken as a whole, the DNA contained in a single human cell is a complete blueprint and instruction manual for the creation of that human being.
In this article we discuss myriad current and developing ways in which …

Go to article

Copyright And The First Amendment: Freedom Or Monopoly Of Expression?, Henry S. Hoberman Jan 2013

Copyright And The First Amendment: Freedom Or Monopoly Of Expression?, Henry S. Hoberman

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Emerging Technologies And Dwindling Speech, Jorge R. Roig Dec 2012

Emerging Technologies And Dwindling Speech, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

Inspired in part by the recent holding in Bland v. Roberts that the use of the “Like” feature in Facebook is not covered by the Free Speech Clause, this article makes a brief foray into the approach that courts have taken in the recent past towards questions of First Amendment coverage in the context of emerging technologies. Specifically, this article will take a closer look at how courts have dealt with the issue of functionality in the context of First Amendment coverage of computer source code. The analysis of this and other recent experiences, when put in a larger context, …

Go to article

The First Amendment, Gaming Advertisements, And Congressional Inconsistency: The Future Of The Commercial Speech Doctrine After Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Ass'n V. United States, Nicholas P. Consula Jul 2012

The First Amendment, Gaming Advertisements, And Congressional Inconsistency: The Future Of The Commercial Speech Doctrine After Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Ass'n V. United States, Nicholas P. Consula

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Decoding First Amendment Coverage Of Computer Source Code In The Age Of Youtube, Facebook And The Arab Spring, Jorge R. Roig Dec 2011

Decoding First Amendment Coverage Of Computer Source Code In The Age Of Youtube, Facebook And The Arab Spring, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

Computer source code is the lifeblood of the Internet. It is also the brick and mortar of cyberspace. As such, it has been argued that the degree of control that a government can wield over code can be a powerful tool for controlling new technologies. With the advent and proliferation in the Internet of social networking media and platforms for the publication and sharing of user-generated content, the ability of individuals across the world to communicate with each other has reached truly revolutionary dimensions.
The influence of Facebook in the popular revolutions of the Arab Spring has been well documented. …

Go to article

Who's Talking? Disentangling Government And Private Speech, Leslie Gielow Jacobs Oct 2002

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 …

Go to article

The First Amendment Status Of Commercial Speech: Why The Fcc Regulations Implementing The Telephone Consumer Protection Act Of 1991 Are Unconstitutional, Deborah L. Hamilton Jun 1996

The First Amendment Status Of Commercial Speech: Why The Fcc Regulations Implementing The Telephone Consumer Protection Act Of 1991 Are Unconstitutional, Deborah L. Hamilton

Michigan Law Review

This Note considers the constitutionality of the FCC's regulations implementing the no-recorded-message provision of the 1991 TCPA and concludes that they violate the First Amendment because they impermissibly distinguish between commercial and noncommercial speech. Part I explains the structure of the FCC's recorded-message regulations and demonstrates that the regulations explicitly distinguish commercial recorded messages from other recorded messages. Part II examines First Amendment protection for commercial speech in light of three 1993 Supreme Court decisions that restructured commercial speech doctrine by holding that the government can single out commercial speech for regulation only in response to a distinct harm arising …

Go to article