Legal History Commons^™

Rage Rhetoric And The Revival Of American Sedition, Jonathan Turley

William & Mary Law Review

We are living in what Professor Jonathan Turley calls an age of rage. However, it is not the first such period. Professor Turley explores how the United States was formed (and the Constitution was written) in precisely such a period. Throughout that history, sedition has been used as the vehicle for criminalizing political speech. This Article explores how seditious libel has evolved as a crime and how it is experiencing a type of American revival. The crime of sedition can be traced back to the infamous trials of the Star Chamber and the flawed view of free speech articulated by …

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 …

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.

The First Thing We Do, Jorge R. Roig

Jorge R Roig

Voice In Government: The People, Emily Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law - Civil Rights - First Amendment Freedoms-Reformulation Of The Clear And Present Danger Doctrine, Bernard A. Petrie

Michigan Law Review

In July 1948 the apostles of Communism in America were indicted under the conspiracy provisions of the Smith Act of 1940. The tension marking both the trial and the present era has obscured the constitutional problems and policy considerations involved. It is the purpose of this comment to trace the history of this cause celebre, Dennis et al. v. United States, and to examine its effect upon our constitutional notions of the permissible bounds of utterance, primarily by an analysis of the appellate opinions.