First Amendment Commons^™

Anti-Antisemitism Now, Lili Levi

University of Miami Law Review

On May 25, 2023, the Biden Administration released The U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism—America’s first national strategy of this kind. In early November 2023, the White House announced the establishment of the first-ever U.S. National Strategy to Counter Islamophobia. These historic commitments respond to increases in identity-based bias incidents and expression against Jews and Muslims. Antisemitic incidents, which were already rising even before the pandemic, increased by almost 400% since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. The war also triggered a sharp upturn in Islamophobic incidents in the U.S., including the shooting of three college students and …

Who Is A Minister? Originalist Deference Expands The Ministerial Exception, Jared C. Huber

Notre Dame Law Review

The ministerial exception is a doctrine born out of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment that shields many religious institutions’ employment decisions from review. While the ministerial exception does not extend to all employment decisions by, or employees of, religious institutions, it does confer broad—and absolute—protection. While less controversy surrounds whether the Constitution shields religious institutions’ employment decisions to at least some extent, much more debate surrounds the exception’s scope, and perhaps most critically, which employees fall under it. In other words, who is a "minister" for purposes of the ministerial exception?

Reforming The Ministerial Exception, Paul E. Mcgreal

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Impossibility Of Corporate Political Ideology: Upholding Sec Climate Disclosures Against Compelled Commercial Speech Challenges, Erin Murphy

Northwestern University Law Review

To address the increasingly dire climate crisis, the SEC will require public companies to reveal their business’s environmental impact to the market through climate disclosures. Businesses and states challenged the required disclosures as compelled, politically motivated speech that risks putting First Amendment doctrine into further jeopardy. In the past five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has demonstrated an increased propensity to hear compelled speech cases and rule in favor of litigants claiming First Amendment protection from disclosing information that they disagree with or believe to be a politically charged topic. Dissenting liberal Justices have decried these practices as “weaponizing the …

The First Religious Charter School: A Viable Option For School Choice Or Prohibited Under The State Action Doctrine And Religion Clauses?, Julia Clementi

Fordham Law Review

After the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses were ratified, church and state became increasingly divorced from one another, as practicing religion became a private activity on which the government could not encroach. This separation, however, was slow, and much credit is owed to the U.S. Supreme Court for its efforts to disentangle the two. One particular area in which the Supreme Court exercised its influence was the U.S. education system; the Court invoked the Religion Clauses and neutrality principles to rid public schools of religious influences and ensure that private religious schools could partake in government programs that were available to …

First Amendment Fetishism, John Kang

Utah Law Review

This Article has not argued for the propriety of restricting speech as a good in its own right. Rather, it argues the Supreme Court has gone too far in protecting the right of highly offensive speech. Instead of weighing the value of such speech in relation to its harms on the community, the Court has eagerly embraced a fetishistic attitude toward the right of speech. This Article has suggested, however, that said fetishism is inconsistent with the original understanding of the right of speech. This Article culled the insights provided by the original understanding of the right of speech and …

The Antidote Of Free Speech: Censorship During The Pandemic, Christopher Keleher

Catholic University Law Review

Free speech in America stands at a precipice. The nation must decide if the First Amendment protects controversial, unconventional, and unpopular speech, or only that which is mainstream, fashionable, and government-approved. This debate is one of many legal battles brought to the fore during Covid-19. But the fallout of the free speech question will transcend Covid-19.

During the pandemic, the federal government took unprecedented steps to pressure private entities to push messages it approved and squelch those it did not. The Supreme Court will soon grapple with the issue of censorship during the pandemic. This article examines this litigation, along …

Unraveling A Ball Of Confusion: Layers Of Criminal Intent, Facebook, Rap, And Uncertainty In Elonis V. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2001 (2015), Cameron L. Fields

Mississippi College Law Review

“So, round and around and around we go. Where the world's heading nobody knows...Just a ball of confusion."

Elonis v. United States was a much-awaited case needed to clarify many questions within its realm. Part of the case's allure was its facts: threats, rap, and Facebook. While the alluring circumstances were well-presented, the potential for clarification was not realized. As the quotes from the various opinions above suggest, a song from the oldies had hinted at this ruling correctly when its lyrics said it's "just a ball of confusion." This Note seeks to unravel this ball of confusion to give, …

It Takes A Village, Not A Schoolhouse: The Deprival Of Parents & Students' Rights To Privacy & Expression In Context Of Bell V. Itawamba, Marcellus D. Chamberlain

Mississippi College Law Review

The notion that "it takes a village to raise a child" is a proverbial adage that still maintains the same, if not greater, relevance today. This simply means the successful upbringing of a child depends not only on the parents, but also on the child's village, which consists of trusted members of the community, extended family, friends of the family, and other mentors. As the child transitions into adulthood, there is an expectation among the village members that the child will use the lessons he or she learns about life and its responsibilities to honor the village accordingly. Some of …

Trick Or Treat?: Mississippi County Doesn't Clown Around With Halloween Costumes, Austin Vining

Mississippi College Law Review

In a poll conducted by Vox and Morning Consult, forty-two percent of Amreicans admitted to fearing clowns. That's a higher percentage than those who fear a terrorist attack (forty-one percent), a family member dying (thirty-eight percent), or an economic collapse (thirty-seven percent). Further, this is significantly more than those with "classic" fears such as heights (twenty-four percent), needles (seventeen percent), or ghosts (nine percent). The survey also revealed that two-thirds of Americans wanted law enforcement officials or government agencies to stop clowns.

Across the country, government officials reacted to concerned constituents' fears by banning clown costumes in certain situations. The …

Protecting "Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs": Lessons From Mississippi Hb 1523, Lindsay Krout Roberts

Mississippi College Law Review

The United States Supreme Court's revolutionary ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which guaranteed marriage equality for homosexual couples in every state, gave life to a new challenge in the area of free exercise of religion: to what extent should persons with religious objections to same-sex marriages be forced to participate in them? Should a Christian baker be legally required to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual marriage to which he or she objects? Must a county clerk with religious objections to homosexual marriage sign a marriage license for a same-sex couple?

In an attempt to pre-empt these types of …

Mapping The Jurisprudence Of The Facebook Court, Tao Huang

Buffalo Law Review

The Oversight Board of Facebook (now Meta) has been described as a “court.” Acting like a judicial body, it adjudicates disputes about content moderation decisions of Meta. In some sense, the Board is a great experiment: it enables us, for the first time, to observe, analyze, and assess how private platforms can borrow the model of judicial review to enhance their governance, how the new platform laws have differed from and interacted with the old State laws, and what new principles, rules, and methods will emerge in this process of interaction, accommodation, and innovation. These developments constitute a crucial part …

Spies, Trolls, And Bots: Combating Foreign Election Interference In The Marketplace Of Ideas, Nahal Kazemi

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

Foreign disinformation operations on social media pose a significant and rapidly evolving risk, particularly when aimed at American elections. We must urgently and effectively address this form of election interference. This Article examines potential responses to those risks, through a review of the unique characteristics, both practical and legal, of political advertising on social media platforms. This Article analyzes proposed legislative responses to foreign disinformation, noting that no single proposed law to date adequately addresses the threats and challenges posed by foreign disinformation. This Article considers the election law landscape in which the proposed laws would operate. It evaluates the …

Petition For Redress Or Telephonic Harassment? When Calling The Government Is A Crime, Daniel Caballero

Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum

The telephone has enabled significant enhancements in communication. However, it has also brought with it abuses. One of these is telephonic harassment. The states and the federal government have passed laws that criminalize this inappropriate and psychologically harmful use of telephones. This Article assumes that these laws are constitutional when the caller harasses an ordinary citizen. But the First Amendment protects the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. So, what happens when the caller is both petitioning the government and intending to harass a government official? Does the First Amendment protect telephonic harassment of a public official? …

The Future Of “History And Tradition”: The First Amendment Implications Of Bruen, The Floersheimer Center For Constitutional Democracy

Event Invitations 2024

Did SCOTUS turn all lower court judges into armchair historians? Could landmark free speech precedents like New York Times Co. v. Sullivan be at risk? How will the Court address modern questions like social media content moderation?

What's Said In The Booth Never Stays In The Booth: A Comparative Analysis Of The Use Of Rap Lyrics In American And English Criminal Trials, Yekaterina Shrayber

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Regulating Social Media Through Family Law, Katharine B. Silbaugh, Adi Caplan-Bricker

Faculty Scholarship

Social media afflicts minors with depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, addiction, suicidality, and eating disorders. States are legislating at a breakneck pace to protect children. Courts strike down every attempt to intervene on First Amendment grounds. This Article clears a path through this stalemate by leveraging two underappreciated frameworks: the latent regulatory power of parental authority arising out of family law, and a hidden family law within First Amendment jurisprudence. These two projects yield novel insights. First, the recent cases offer a dangerous understanding of the First Amendment, one that should not survive the family law reasoning we provide. First Amendment jurisprudence …

Assessing The Future Of “Offended Observer” Standing In Establishment Clause Cases, Larry J. Obhof

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article looks at the anomaly of “offended observer” standing in Establishment Clause challenges. It calls for greater consistency in the courts’ application of constitutional standing requirements.

Under Article III, Plaintiffs seeking to raise claims in federal court must allege a concrete and particularized injury in fact in order to support federal jurisdiction. Likewise, plaintiffs seeking to challenge a government policy must allege a unique injury that is separate from the interests of the public at large. The notable exception is where plaintiffs claim personal offense at alleged government entanglement in religion. These “offended observers” are frequently given access to …

Rereading Pico And The Equal Protection Clause, Johany G. Dubon

Fordham Law Review

More than forty years ago, in Board of Education v. Pico, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of a school board’s decision to remove books from its libraries. However, the Court’s response was heavily fractured, garnering seven separate opinions. In the plurality opinion, three justices stated that the implicit corollary to a student’s First Amendment right to free speech is the right to receive information. Thus, the plurality announced that the relevant inquiry for reviewing a school’s library book removal actions is whether the school officials intended to deny students access to ideas with which the officials disagreed. …

The Ideology Of Press Freedom, Hannah Bloch-Wehba

Faculty Scholarship

This Article offers a critical account of the law of press freedom. American law and political culture laud the press as an institution that plays a vital role in democracy: guarding against corruption, facilitating self-governance, and advocating for free expression. These democratic functions provide justification for the law of press freedom, which defends the media’s autonomy and shields the press from outside interference.

But the dominant accounts of the press’s democratic role are only partly accurate. The law of press freedom is grounded in large part in journalism’s professional commitments to objectivity, public service, and autonomy. These idealized characterizations, flawed …