First Amendment Commons^™

The Future Of Freedom Of Expression Online, Evelen Mary Aswad

Duke Law & Technology Review

Should social media companies ban Holocaust denial from their platforms? What about conspiracy theorists that spew hate? Does good corporate citizenship mean platforms should remove offensive speech or tolerate it? The content moderation rules that companies develop to govern speech on their platforms will have significant implications for the future of freedom of expression. Given that the prospects for compelling platforms to respect users’ free speech rights are bleak within the U.S. system, what can be done to protect this important right? In June 2018, the United Nations’ top expert for freedom of expression called on companies to align ...

Lady Justice Cannot Hear Your Prayers, Deborah Ogali

Fordham Law Review

The Islamic finance industry continues to grow quickly as the appetite for everything, from Sharia-compliant home mortgages and car loans to sophisticated financial products, increases. This growth has triggered an interest in sukuk, bond-like financial instruments. And while the international market for sukuk has long been dominated by foreign issuers and English law, the attraction of a niche market compatible with U.S. federal and international securities laws may propel increased participation by U.S. issuers and investors who wish to transact under U.S. federal and state laws. As with all Islamic financial products, sukuk transactions inherently pose a ...

Is The First Amendment Obsolete?, Tim Wu

Michigan Law Review

The First Amendment was brought to life in a period, the twentieth century, when the political speech environment was markedly different than today’s. With respect to any given issue, speech was scarce and limited to a few newspapers, pamphlets or magazines. The law was embedded, therefore, with the presumption that the greatest threat to free speech was direct punishment of speakers by government.

Today, in the internet and social media age, it is no longer speech that is scarce—rather, it is the attention of listeners. And those who seek to control speech use new methods that rely on ...

Long-Term Preservation Of Public Art: From Cultural Heritage To The Confederacy, Maliha Ikram

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

Corporate Constitutional Rights: Easy And Hard Cases, Kent Greenfield

Boston College Law School Faculty Papers

No abstract provided.

Dialing It Back: Why Courts Should Rethink Students’ Privacy And Speech Rights As Cell Phone Communications Erode The ‘Schoolhouse Gate’, Nicholas J. Mcguire

Duke Law & Technology Review

The ubiquity of cell phones in today’s society has forced courts to change or dismiss established, but inapplicable analytical frameworks. Two such frameworks in the school setting are regulations of student speech and of student searches. This Article traces the constitutional jurisprudence of both First Amendment off-campus speech protection and Fourth Amendment search standards as applied to the school setting. It then analyzes how the Supreme Court’s ruling in Riley v. California complicates both areas. Finally, it proposes a pragmatic solution: by recognizing a categorical First Amendment exception for “substantial threats” against the school community, courts could accommodate ...

Patin V. Lee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (Nov. 15, 2018) (En Banc), Haley Jaramillo

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that a statement by an attorney on her firm’s website summarizing a jury’s verdict is not a statement in direct connection with an issue under consideration by a judicial body. The Court explained that because the statement is not a “good faith communication in furtherance of the right . . . to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern,” it would not receive anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) protection under NRS § 41.660(1).

Due Process, Free Expression, And The Administrative State, Martin H. Redish, Kristin Mccall

Notre Dame Law Review

The first Part of this Article will explore the theoretical foundations of procedural due process, focusing particularly on the essential due process requirement of a neutral adjudicator. We will follow that discussion with an analysis of the extent to which administrative adjudication of constitutional challenges to its regulatory authority or decisions satisfies the demands of procedural due process. After concluding that administrative regulators categorically fail to satisfy the requirements of due process, at least in the context of constitutional challenges to their regulatory authority, we will explain why the availability of post–administrative judicial review cannot cure the constitutional defect ...

Children Are Crying And Dying While The Supreme Court Is Hiding: Why Public Schools Should Have Broad Authority To Regulate Off-Campus Bullying "Speech", Jennifer Butwin

Fordham Law Review

Bullying has long been a concern for students, parents, teachers, and school administrators. But technological advances—including the internet, cell phones, and social media—have transformed the nature of bullying and allow “cyberbullies” to extend their reach far beyond the schoolhouse gate. The U.S. Supreme Court established that schools may regulate on-campus speech if the speech creates a substantial disruption of, or material interference with, school activities. However, the Court has yet to rule on a school’s ability to regulate students’ off-campus bullying speech. This Note examines how various courts have approached the issue, analyzes the current circuit ...

Religious Liberty: Fundamental Right Or Nuisance, Vincent Martin Bonventre

University of St. Thomas Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jenna Wims Hashway's Blog: First Amendment Lets Officials Mute But Not Block Twitter Critics 10/09/2018, Jenna Wims Hashway

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

When Sports Stand Against Human Rights: Regulating Restrictions On Athlete Speech In The Global Sports Arena, Faraz Shahlaei

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

Even after the International Olympic Committee’s quick and harsh response to the “black power salute” in the 1968 Olympic Games— positing that the apolitical Olympic Games were not a suitable venue for domestic political statements—athletes continued using their platform to protest human rights violations. Should such conduct be allowed? Are athletes entitled to display their political opinions on the field? Or should athletic organizations be allowed to regulate their athletes’ protests and political speech in the arena? On the one hand, freedom of speech is a fundamental human right. On the other, sports have a long history of ...

The Law Of Advertising Outrage, Mark Bartholomew

Journal Articles

This article examines the stimulation of audience outrage, both as a marketing strategy and as a subject of legal regulation. A brief history of advertising in the United States reveals repeated yet relatively infrequent attempts to attract consumer attention through overt transgressions of social norms relating to sex, violence, race, and religion. Natural concerns over audience reaction limited use of this particular advertising tactic as businesses needed to be careful not to alienate prospective purchasers. But now companies can engage in “algorithmic outrage”—social media advertising meant to stimulate individual feelings of anger and upset—with less concern for a ...

Is The Cure Worse Than The Disease?: Censorship Of Hate Speech May Well Increase Violence, Gordon Danning

Nevada Law Journal Forum

From Charlottesville to college campuses, people with odious hate groups have risen in notoriety recently. Responses to those people and the groups to which they belong have ranged from efforts to keep them from speaking in person, to deleting their presence on the internet, to efforts to have them terminated from their jobs or evicted from their apartments, and even to physical assault by members of such groups as Antifa. Such efforts at censoring, ostracizing, and stigmatizing hate group members are generally justified by claims that such individuals are dangerous. It is true that some scholars have found an association ...

Laying Siege To The Ivory Tower: Resource Allocation In Response To The Heckler's Veto On University Campuses, Macklin W. Thornton

San Diego Law Review

High in the towers of academia, the lofty ideals of free speech are tossed around with a deceptive ease. However, as legal minds grapple with heady legal doctrines, free speech has concrete consequences down at the foot of those towers. At this ivory base, the property line between the university and the community blur. Students and nonstudents assemble and deliver conflicting speech that, at times, foments violence. Molotov cocktails, gun shots, broken windows, disgruntled students. All attempts to trigger the dreaded heckler’s veto—an attempt the government has an obligation to prevent. In addition to the public relations disasters ...

Section 1: Moot Court: Nieves, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law At The College Of William & Mary School Of Law

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Meaning Of Wrongdoing - A Crime Of Disrespecting The Flag: Grounds For Preserving National Unity, Mohammed Saif-Alden Wattad

San Diego International Law Journal

To conclude on this issue, the rights of others, as individuals and as a whole, are formulated as the social protected interest that criminal law seeks to protect through criminal means, and it is with these rights that criminal law theory should be concerned in the first level of scrutiny. However, in the second level of scrutiny, an additional set of rights are brought into play; these are the rights of the individual, namely the actor, to exercise their constitutional rights e.g., free speech, liberty, free exercise of religion. The second level of scrutiny requires balancing those rights with ...

Fool Me Once: Regulating "Fake News" And Other Online Advertising, Abby Wood, Ann M. Ravel

University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series

A lack of transparency for online political advertising has long been a problem in American political campaigns. Disinformation attacks that American voters have experienced since the 2016 campaign have made the need for regulatory action more pressing.

Platforms desire self-regulation and have only recently come around to supporting transparency regulations. While government must not regulate the content of political speech, it can, and should, force transparency into the process. We propose several interventions aimed at transparency. Most importantly, campaign finance regulators should require platforms to store and make available ads run on their platforms, as well as the audience at ...

Introduction, Annette Clark

Seattle University Law Review

Introductory remarks given by Dean Annette Clark at the 2018 Seattle University School of Law symposium “Singularity: AI and the Law.”

Panel 1: Robotic Speech And The First Amendment, Bruce E. H. Johnson, Helen Norton, David Skover

Seattle University Law Review

Transcript of the panel discussion at the 2018 Seattle University School of Law symposium “Singularity: AI and the Law.” The panel is moderated by Seattle University School of Law Professor Gregory Silverman, and discusses the forthcoming book Robotica, by David M. Skover and Ronald K. L. Collins. The panelists are Bruce E. H. Johnson, Helen Norton, and David M. Skover.