Legal History Commons^™

The Second Founding And The First Amendment, William M. Carter Jr.

Articles

Constitutional doctrine generally proceeds from the premise that the original intent and public understanding of pre-Civil War constitutional provisions carries forward unchanged from the colonial Founding era. This premise is flawed because it ignores the Nation’s Second Founding: i.e., the constitutional moment culminating in the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments and the civil rights statutes enacted pursuant thereto. The Second Founding, in addition to providing specific new individual rights and federal powers, also represented a fundamental shift in our constitutional order. The Second Founding’s constitutional regime provided that the underlying systemic rules and norms of the First Founding’s Constitution …

"The Road I Can't Help Travelling": Holmes On Truth And Persuadability, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court’S Two Constitutions: A First Look At The “Reverse Polarity” Cases, Arthur D. Hellman

Articles

In the traditional approach to ideological classification, “liberal” judicial decisions are those that support civil liberties claims; “conservative” decisions are those that reject them. That view – particularly associated with the Warren Court era – is reflected in numerous academic writings and even an article by a prominent liberal judge. Today, however, there is mounting evidence that the traditional assumptions about the liberal-conservative divide are incorrect or at best incomplete. In at least some areas of constitutional law, the traditional characterizations have been reversed. Across a wide variety of constitutional issues, support for claims under the Bill of Rights or …

Learned Hand's Seven Other Ideas About The Freedom Of Speech, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

I say “other” because, regarding the freedom of speech, Learned Hand has suffered the not uncommon fate of having his best ideas either drowned out or credited exclusively to others due to the excessive attention that has been bestowed on one of his lesser ideas. Sitting as a district judge in the case of Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten, Hand wrote the earliest judicial opinion about the freedom of speech that has attained canonical status. He ruled that under the recently passed Espionage Act of 1917, writings critical of government cannot be grounds for imposing criminal punishment or the …

Today's Porn: Not A Constitutional Right; Not A Human Right, Patrick Trueman

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Defamatory Non-Media Speech And First Amendment Methodology, Steven H. Shiffrin

Steven H. Shiffrin

In the course of his eloquent commentary upon New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the late Professor Kalven enthused that the Court had written "an opinion that may prove to be the best and most important it has ever produced in the realm of freedom of speech." This excitement was generated not by the Court's rather narrow holding but rather by the hope that Sullivan would serve as the opening wedge to dislodge the clear and present danger test, to dismantle the "two-level" approach to first amendment analysis (reflected in cases such as Chaplinsky, Beauharnais, and Roth), and instead to …

Does It Matter How One Opposes Memory Bans? A Commentary On Liberte Pour L'Histoire, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

This paper examines Liberté pour l'Histoire, a group of French historians who led the charge against that nation’s memory laws, in the process raising unique arguments not found elsewhere in the debate over hate speech regulation. Some of these arguments – such as a focus on how the constitutional structure of the Fifth Republic encouraged memory laws – advance our understanding of the connection between hate speech bans and political institutions. Other arguments, however, are more problematic. In particular, Liberté historians struggle to distinguish the Holocaust (which is illegal to deny) from the Armenian Genocide (which is not). The Liberté …

When Should Rights "Trump"? An Examination Of Speech And Property, Laura S. Underkuffler

Laura S. Underkuffler

No abstract provided.

The First Thing We Do, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

The Thirteenth Amendment And Pro-Equality Speech, William M. Carter Jr.

Articles

The Thirteenth Amendment’s Framers envisioned the Amendment as providing federal authority to eliminate the “badges and incidents of slavery.” The freemen and their descendants are the most likely to be burdened with the effects of stigma, stereotypes, and structural discrimination arising from the slave system. Because African Americans are therefore the most obvious beneficiaries of the Amendment’s promise to eliminate the legacy of slavery, it is often mistakenly assumed that federal power to eradicate the badges and incidents of slavery only permits remedies aimed at redressing the subordination of African Americans. While African Americans were the primary victims of slavery …

Apuntes Generales Sobre La Libertad De Expresión En Internet, Germán M. Teruel Lozano

Germán M. Teruel Lozano

GENERAL NOTES ABOUT THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN INTERNET: This paper presents an overview of how Internet has revolutionized the setting of freedom of speech. In particular, it is focused in to main aspects: On one hand, the delimitation of freedom of expression in the new media, differentiating in particular between web pages dedicated to the dissemination of information, protected by the freedom of speech; and those that are intended to provide other telematics services, which should not have this protection. Secondly, it is also studied the legal status of this freedom when it is exercised through Internet.

Civil Rights And Civil Liberties: Whose “Rule Of Law”?, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

When Should Rights "Trump"? An Examination Of Speech And Property, Laura S. Underkuffler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Voice In Government: The People, Emily Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

Congressional Power And Free Speech: Levy’S Legacy Revisited, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

How Useful Is Judicial Review In Free Speech Cases?, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Graphic Review Of The Free Speech Clause, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Scholarship

This work acts as a spring board for the study of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. It builds useful graphical representations of complex constitutional theories from the ground up, allowing students to follow both development and the application of these theories.

Defamatory Non-Media Speech And First Amendment Methodology, Steven H. Shiffrin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In the course of his eloquent commentary upon New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the late Professor Kalven enthused that the Court had written "an opinion that may prove to be the best and most important it has ever produced in the realm of freedom of speech." This excitement was generated not by the Court's rather narrow holding but rather by the hope that Sullivan would serve as the opening wedge to dislodge the clear and present danger test, to dismantle the "two-level" approach to first amendment analysis (reflected in cases such as Chaplinsky, Beauharnais, and Roth …