First Amendment Commons^™

Section 230 As Civil Rights Statute, Enrique Armijo

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Many of our most pressing discussions about justice, progress, and civil rights have moved online. Activists advocating for social change no longer need to be in the same physical space to connect with others who share their challenges and aspirations. But the convergence of mobility, connectivity, and technology is not the only reason why. Thanks to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act’s (“Section 230”) immunity for online platforms, websites, and their hosts, speakers can engage in speech about protest, equality, and dissent without fear of collateral censorship from governments, authorities, and others in power who hope to silence them. …

Self-Determination In American Discourse: The Supreme Court’S Historical Indoctrination Of Free Speech And Expression, Jarred Williams

Honors Theses

Within the American criminal legal system, it is a well-established practice to presume the innocence of those charged with criminal offenses unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Such a judicial framework-like approach, called a legal maxim, is utilized in order to ensure that the law is applied and interpreted in ways that legislative bodies originally intended.

The central aim of this piece in relation to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution is to investigate whether the Supreme Court of the United States has utilized a specific legal maxim within cases that dispute government speech or expression regulation. …

International Megan's Law As Compelled Speech, Alexandra R. Genord

Michigan Law Review

“The bearer was convicted of a sex offense against a minor, and is a covered sex offender pursuant to 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l).” International Megan’s Law (IML), passed in 2016, prohibits the State Department from issuing passports to individuals convicted of a sex offense against a minor unless those passports are branded with this phrase. The federal government's decision to brand its citizens’ passports with this stigmatizing message is novel and jarring, but the sole federal district court to consider a constitutional challenge to the passport identifier dismissed the plaintiffs’ First Amendment claim, deeming the provision government speech. …

Free Speech, Public Safety, & Controversial Speakers: Balancing Universities' Dual Roles After Charlottesville, Elisabeth E. Constantino

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note seeks to develop an approach to hateful and controversial speech that protects First Amendment values and students alike. Part I discusses the legal backdrop and First Amendment tradition that underlies a permissive view of hateful speech on university campuses. Part I also discusses the roots of time, place, and manner regulations and the public forum doctrine, both of which recent legislation invokes. Part II provides a timeline of events that have highlighted the tension between free speech and public safety on campuses. Part II also discusses the eruption of legislation that these events inspired. Finally, Part III …

Newsroom: Donald Trump Vs. Roger Williams 05-09-2017, David Logan

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Trending @ Rwu Law: Professor Niki Kuckes's Post: 'Disparaging' Trademarks Meet The First Amendment 02-07-2017, Niki Kuckes

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

After Citizens United: Extending The Liberal Revolution To The Multinational Corporation, Daniel J.H. Greenwood

Daniel J.H. Greenwood

This Article proposes several routes to reverse Citizens United, the Supreme Court case holding that corporate campaign spending is “speech” protected by the First Amendment.

The core problem of Citizens United is that corporations are illegitimate participants in our politics. Corporate law requires corporate officers to pursue the corporate interest. They are thus disqualified from considering the central political questions of a democratic capitalist country: defining the rules of the market (which define corporate interests) and balancing profit against other, more important, values.

The high road to fixing Citizens United is a constitutional amendment to extend the fundamental insights …

House Of Cards: How Rediscovering Republicanism Brings It Crashing Down, Jonathan E. Maddison

Catholic University Law Review

Using Frank Underwood’s maniacal political journey in the Netflix series House of Cards as an example of what is wrong with American politics, this article argues that the Supreme Court’s misapplication of First Amendment principles in Citizens United and other key campaign finance cases plays a large and problematic role. Providing an extensive historical overview of republicanism and First Amendment jurisprudence, this article suggests that a return to republican ideals, while not perfect, is both the solution and proper tool of analysis to be used by the Supreme Court for campaign finance cases and beyond.

The Conforming Effect: First Amendment Implications Of Surveillance, Beyond Chilling Speech, Margot E. Kaminski, Shane Witnov

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

N.L.R.B. Campaign Propaganda: A Call For Congressional Reform, Susan Gardner

Pepperdine Law Review

With its decision in Midland National Life Insurance Company, the National Labor Relations Board no longer probes into the truth or falsity of statements made during he course of preelection campaigns. The decision marks the third policy reversal in regulating campaign propaganda during the last five years. Of concern to employers and unions is the uncertainty of Board resolutions in this area, particularly when each policy reversal was preceded immediately by Presidential appointments to the Board. This article traces the shifting Board policy of regulating campaign misrepresentations and calls for Congressional intervention to stabilize the preelection process.

First Amendment Implications Of Rock Lyric Censorship, Michael A. Coletti

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

The Legislative Process And The Rule Of Law: Attempts To Legislate Taste In Moral And Political Beliefs, Samuel D. Estep

Michigan Law Review

In a nutshell, the topic of this paper is "Comstockery and the Bowdlerizing of Ideas." The thesis here asserted is that the Rule of Law is violated when legislatures succumb to modern attempts by the often pathologically-motivated zealot legally to freeze current tastes in moral and political beliefs. The relationship between taste statutes and the seemingly esoteric topic, "The Legislative Process and the Rule of Law," is based on the premise that the maximum possible degree of intellectual freedom for each individual is an essential ingredient in the legal system of a civilized society.