Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 1st Amendment (6)
- Corporation (6)
- First Amendment (6)
- Freedom (6)
- Speech (6)
-
- Corporate (5)
- Corporate personhood (5)
- Free (5)
- Adam Candeub (1)
- Adam Winkler (1)
- Bruce Freed (1)
- Campaign contributions (1)
- Campaign finance (1)
- Charlie Cray (1)
- Communication (1)
- Dana Gold (1)
- Daniel Greenwood (1)
- David Skover (1)
- David Vladeck (1)
- Eric Chiappinelli (1)
- Eric Jaffe (1)
- Evidence (1)
- FTOs (1)
- Foreign terrorist organization (1)
- Health of democracy (1)
- Internet (1)
- Inventory search (1)
- Jeffrey Chester (1)
- Kasky (1)
- Kent Greenfield (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Corporatization Of Communication, Eric Chiappinelli, Adam Candeub, Jeffrey Chester, Lawrence Soley
The Corporatization Of Communication, Eric Chiappinelli, Adam Candeub, Jeffrey Chester, Lawrence Soley
Seattle University Law Review
Our next panel discusses the corporatization of communication.
Corporations And Commercial Speech, Ron Collins, Mark Lopez, Tamara Piety, David Vladeck
Corporations And Commercial Speech, Ron Collins, Mark Lopez, Tamara Piety, David Vladeck
Seattle University Law Review
Today's discussion will be about a rather famous case-actually, a non-case, Nike v. Kasky.
Charity Of The Heart And Sword: The Material Support Offense And Personal Guilt, David Henrik Pendle
Charity Of The Heart And Sword: The Material Support Offense And Personal Guilt, David Henrik Pendle
Seattle University Law Review
In Part I, this Comment details the designation process of FTOs and examines the wide array of purposes and activities in which FTOs engage. Part III chronicles how § 2339B has evolved through amendments and judicial interpretation. Part IV establishes that Scales controls the personal guilt analysis and identifies due process concerns implicated by Scales that have been overlooked by the courts. Finally, Part V argues a recklessness standard is the most appropriate fix to § 2339B and proposes a model amendment to that end.
After Thirty Years, Is It Time To Change The Vehicle Inventory Search Doctrine?, Nicholas B. Stampfli
After Thirty Years, Is It Time To Change The Vehicle Inventory Search Doctrine?, Nicholas B. Stampfli
Seattle University Law Review
Part II of this Comment will describe the inventory search as it has developed in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence in order to provide background and understanding of the procedure as it stands today. Part III will address the difficulties in applying the Supreme Court's approach by comparing the differences in police department policies. Part IV will then closely examine Washington's somewhat laudable approach to inventory searches, the limits the state has placed on the scope of inventory searches, and the steps the state has taken to impose a consent requirement. Last, Part V will suggest much needed reforms for Washington …
Should Corporations Have First Amendment Rights?, Kent Greenfield, Daniel Greenwood, Erik Jaffe
Should Corporations Have First Amendment Rights?, Kent Greenfield, Daniel Greenwood, Erik Jaffe
Seattle University Law Review
As Professor Winkler correctly stated, current doctrine emphasizes the rights of listeners rather than the identity of corporate speakers. My argument is, in effect, that this emphasis misses the key point. But I will not deal with listeners directly. I am simply going to assume, rather than argue, that if corporate advertising were ineffective in influencing voters or legislators, normal market processes would eliminate it. I'm going to take it for granted that when corporations speak, it makes a difference in the actual results.
Corporations And Political Speech: Should Speech Equal Money?, David Skover, Lisa Danetz, Martin Redish, Scott Thomas
Corporations And Political Speech: Should Speech Equal Money?, David Skover, Lisa Danetz, Martin Redish, Scott Thomas
Seattle University Law Review
Welcome now to the panel on corporations and political speech. We will explore the First Amendment jurisprudence of campaign finance regulation and some of the more controversial issues raised by corporate involvement in the marketplace of political ideas and elections.
Panelist Biographies, Introduction By Dana Gold, Editor's Note, Dana L. Gold
Panelist Biographies, Introduction By Dana Gold, Editor's Note, Dana L. Gold
Seattle University Law Review
This conference brought together nationally recognized scholars, attorneys, policymakers and activists from across the country who represent a depth of knowledge and range of viewpoints necessary to explore the intersection of corporate and First Amendment law. This discussion was sometimes heated, frequently politically surprising, and always robust. In this symposium issue, the Seattle University Law Review has captured the presentations and exchanges at this unique, multidisciplinary conference.
Corporate Personhood And The Rights Of Corporate Speech, Adam Winkler
Corporate Personhood And The Rights Of Corporate Speech, Adam Winkler
Seattle University Law Review
My objective here is to provide a little historical background on business corporations and their place in First Amendment law. In the course of that overview, I will also make a few observations that I believe can be helpful in thinking about corporate speech rights. First, I will argue that one aspect of the constitutional status of corporations-the notion of corporate personhood-has not played the central role in shaping corporate speech rights that some believe. Corporations have free speech rights, but they are more limited than those held by individuals. Second, I will argue that there is not a single …