Law Commons^™

The Public’S Companies, Andrew K. Jennings

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

This Essay uses a series of survey studies to consider how public understandings of public and private companies map into urgent debates over the role of the corporation in American society. Does a social-media company, for example, owe it to its users to follow the free-speech principles embodied in the First Amendment? May corporate managers pursue environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) policies that could reduce short-term or long-term profits? How should companies respond to political pushback against their approaches to free expression or ESG?

The studies’ results are consistent with understandings that both public and private companies have greater public …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

United States Food Law Update: Shrouded By Election-Year Politics, State Initiatives And Private Lawsuits Fill In The Gaps Created By Congressional And Agency Ossification, A. Bryan Endres, Lisa R. Schlessinger, Rachel Armstrong

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Observers of food law in the 2012 presidential election year witnessed a dramatic slowing of federal initiatives-perhaps arising from a desire by both Congress and the administration to avoid upsetting critical constituent groups during a year seemingly dominated by campaigns and endless talking points. For example, Congress failed to take action on a unique compromise between what some had considered mortal enemies-the Humane Society of the United States and United Egg Producers-that would implement a federal animal welfare standard for laying hens in return for abandoning ballot measures in various states. Similarly, the FDA waited until the early days of …

Corporate Entanglement With Religion And The Suppression Of Expression, Ronald J. Colombo

Seattle University Law Review

The power and ability of corporations to assert their First Amendment rights to the detriment of others remains both a controversial and unresolved issue. Adverting to relevant strands of existing jurisprudence and certain constitutionally relevant factors, this Article suggests a solution. The path turns upon the recognition that whereas some corporations are appropriately categorized as rights-bearing entities (akin to associations), others are more appropriately categorized as “entities against which the rights of individuals can be asserted.” Legislation, in the form of the draft “CENSOR” Act, is provided as a means by which to implement this categorization. What hopefully emerges is …

Saving The First Amendment From Itself: Relief From The Sherman Act Against The Rabbinic Cartels, Barak D. Richman

Pepperdine Law Review

America’s rabbis currently structure their employment market with rules that flagrantly violate the Sherman Act. The consequences of these rules, in addition to the predictable economic outcomes of inflated wages for rabbis and restricted consumer freedoms for the congregations that employ them, meaningfully hinder Jewish communities from seeking their preferred spiritual leader. Although the First Amendment cannot combat against this privately-orchestrated (yet paradigmatic) restriction on religious expression, the Sherman Act can. Ironically, however, the rabbinic organizations implementing the restrictive policies claim that the First Amendment immunizes them from Sherman Act scrutiny, thereby claiming the First Amendment empowers them to do …

A Subsidy By Any Other Name: First Amendment Implications Of The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act Of 1999, Andrew D. Cotlar

Federal Communications Law Journal

The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (“SHVIA”) changed the face of the market for television video services by authorizing direct broadcast satellite carriers to carry local television stations within their own local markets. This Article discusses the carriage provisions of SHVIA, currently the subject of a First Amendment challenge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and also the basis upon which the Federal Communications Commission recently issued new rules. SHVIA poses some very interesting, potentially far-reaching First Amendment issues. This Article examines the mechanics of the law, as well as its constitutional implications.

Antitrust Language Barriers: First Amendment Constraints On Defining An Antitrust Market By A Broadcast's Language, And Its Implications For Audiences, Competition, And Democracy, Catherine J.K. Sandoval

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article explores whether the language of a broadcaster's program appropriately defines an antitrust market, consistent with First Amendment and antitrust principles. In its evaluation of the 2008 private equity buyout of Clear Channel Communications, the Department of Justice ("DOJ") defined the antitrust market by the language of the broadcast, as it had done for the 2003 merger of Univision and Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation. This Article uses social science research on Spanish and English-language radio and television to evaluate that decision. It argues that the distinct content and messages that characterize Spanish and English-language programming show that market definition is …

You Said What? The Perils Of Content-Based Regulation Of Public Broadcast Underwriting Acknowledgments, Andrew D. Cotlar

Federal Communications Law Journal

Public broadcast stations in the United States are forbidden to air promotional announcements in exchange for payment from commercial entities. However, these stations must acknowledge any financial contribution from donors that support particular programs without promoting the goods and services offered by those donors. While the FCC has attempted to maintain the conceptual distinction between promotional and nonpromotional information, it has struggled to apply this distinction within the context of an evolution in advertising practice.

As a result, many noncommercial educational licensees find it difficult to apply the FCC's rules. A careful analysis of how the FCC underwriting determinations yields …

Rehearsal For Media Regulation: Congress Versus The Telegraph-News Monopoly, 1866-1900, Menahem Blondheim

Federal Communications Law Journal

In this Article, Menahem Blondheim presents a critical historical analysis of the dawn of communications regulation as it began with the evolution of domestic telegraphy and developed into a coherent link between 19th century technological, business, and social developments and twentieth century First Amendment thought. First, the Article examines the political and economic environment which led to the development of national telegraph and news networks, like Western Union and the Associated Press. The Author then proceeds to assess the role of the mid-to-late nineteenth century American legislature, and how the debate over telegraph and wire service regulation realigned the powers …

Legislating The Tower Of Babel: International Restrictions On Internet Content And The Marketplace Of Ideas, Michael F. Sutton

Federal Communications Law Journal

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the expression of diverse viewpoints in virtually any medium. Nevertheless, the modern novelty of "borderless" communication via the Internet strains our ideal of keeping government out of the business of regulating speech. This Note reveals the conflict between the First Amendment's national protections and the Internet's lack of national boundaries, while also arguing for international intervention for the protection of free speech. This Author articulates the real danger of "watered-down speech" unless both the FCC and the international community provide regulations and harmonized international standards for online content that reflect First Amendment …

Revisiting The Vast Wasteland, Newton N. Minow, Fred H. Cate

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Cable Internet Unbundling: Local Leadership In The Deployment High Speed Access, Marcus Maher

Federal Communications Law Journal

With the pending merger of TCI and AT&T and their promise of "one-stop" television, Internet, and telephone service, the cable Internet issues move to the forefront. The desire of traditional Internet Service Providers to gain access to new high-speed technologies for Internet access led to requests for unbundling or open access to cable systems. Despite the heated debate on the need for unbundling that has occurred at the federal level, local authorities have taken the lead in requiring open access to cable for competing ISPs. General anticompetitive concerns with cable Internet dominated by the cable company could be alleviated in …

First Amendment Trump?: The Uncertain Constitutionalization Of Structural Regulation Separating Telephone And Video, Susan Dente Ross

Federal Communications Law Journal

The Cable Act of 1984 contained a "cross-ownership" ban, which prohibited telephone companies from entering the local cable video market. Although the ban was challenged by telephone carriers on numerous grounds, the First Amendment was not the basis of any challenge until the mid-1990s when telephone companies sought to characterize themselves not just as carriers but as content suppliers, or "speakers," who were deprived of their right to speak as a result of common carrier regulations that were intended merely to control the economic structure of the communications industry. Using the First Amendment as a new-found constitutional weapon to challenge …

Jefferson On The Internet, Nicholas Johnson

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Challenging The Telco-Cable Cross-Ownership Ban: First Amendment And Antitrust Implications For The Interactive Information Highway, Laura Land Sigal

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Note explores options available to decisionmakers by analyzing Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. United States (C & P), which set an important precedent regarding a telephone company's First Amendment right to provide video programming over its own facilities in its local service area. C & P, a Bell Atlantic Corporation subsidiary providing local telephone service in Northern Virginia, claimed that the cable-telco cross-ownership ban, codified at § 533(b) of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, infringes unconstitutionally upon its First Amendment right to freedom of expression. On November 21, 1994, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth …

The Cable-Telco Cross-Ownership Prohibition: First Amendment Infringement Through Obsolescence, Michael G. Oxley

Federal Communications Law Journal

Since 1970, the FCC has prohibited all telephone companies from providing video programming in their local service areas. The primary rationale behind this prohibition was to promote the cable industry. Since 1984, however, the cable industry has seen tremendous growth with very little competition. New technology and market demands have now necessitated a reevaluation of the ban on cable-telco cross-ownership. The Author argues that with the changes that have occurred in the marketplace, the ban is now both an invalid prior restraint and an infringement on commercial expression and thus a violation of the First Amendment rights of telephone companies. …

The Cable Act And Municipal Ownership: A Growing First Amendment Confrontation, Carl R. Ramey

Federal Communications Law Journal

In many communities across the nation cable subscribers depend on government-owned cable television systems for their communication services. This phenomenon may have started out to be fairly insignificant, but as a result of the cable explosion, government ownership of cable systems presents a threat to free expression. Governmental overbuilding and direct competition with private cable service providers have been the subject of unsuccessful First Amendment challenges. The threat of government control of cable systems, though, is potentially dramatic and poses serious First Amendment questions. The Author concludes that private ownership should be encouraged, and public ownership should only be allowed …