Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment (3)
- At-will employee (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Constitutional right (1)
- Forseeability threshold (1)
-
- Free Exercise Clause (1)
- Gender equality (1)
- Henderson State University (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Liberation of African-Americans (1)
- Liberation of women (1)
- Municipality libability (1)
- Online speech (1)
- Pine Bluff (1)
- Public accommodation laws (1)
- Race discrimination (1)
- Racial equality (1)
- Religion-based exemptions (1)
- Religious free speech (1)
- Service refusal (1)
- Student speech (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Supreme Court precedents (1)
- Tofurky (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Foreseeably Uncertain: The (In)Ability Of School Officials To Reasonably Foresee Substantial Disruption To The School Environment, Maggie Geren
Arkansas Law Review
“Ms. Sarah Phelps is the worst teacher I’ve ever met.” While the name of this Facebook page is perhaps a bit harsh, most would hardly view it as grounds for school suspension. The very heart of the First Amendment, and indeed the notion for which our Framers drafted it, is the right of citizens to “think, speak, write and worship as they wish, not as the Government commands.” Without this fundamental freedom—one that has persevered despite countless efforts to narrow its reach—the American people would live in constant fear of backlash and suppression for merely voicing their opinions.
Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand
Recent Developments, Peyton Hildebrand
Arkansas Law Review
The Eighth Circuit upheld preliminary injunctive relief in favor of the plaintiffs who challenged Arkansas's anti-loitering law for violating their free speech rights. Though Arkansas claimed that it would not enforce the anti-loitering statute against "'polite' and 'courteous' beggars like [plaintiffs]," because the law's plain language applied to the plaintiffs' intended activities, they had an objectively reasonable fear of prosecution.' Thus, they had a constitutional injury as required for standing.
Pandora's Cake, Mark R. Killenbeck
Pandora's Cake, Mark R. Killenbeck
Arkansas Law Review
Most of us are familiar with the spectre of Pandora's Box, the "present which seems valuable, but which in reality is a curse."' Robert Graves described Pandora as "the most beautiful [woman] ever created.",2 She was sent by Zeus as a gift to Epimetheus, who initially "respectfully" declined to marry her.3 But chastened by the fate of his brother Prometheus, he changed his mind and wed a women who was "as foolish, mischievous, and idle as she was beautiful.",4 She opened a jar that she and her husband had been "warned. .. to keep closed in which"5 Prometheus had "imprison[ed …
Expanding Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado To Protect Criminal Defendants From Explicit Gender Animus, Katie Hicks
Expanding Peña-Rodriguez V. Colorado To Protect Criminal Defendants From Explicit Gender Animus, Katie Hicks
Arkansas Law Review
In 2017, the United States Supreme Court extinguished explicit racial animus expressed during juror deliberations criminal trials. Though courts have repeatedly cloaked the jury’s deliberation room—essentially, “black box”—in impenetrable armor, Miguel Angel Peña-Rodriguez leveraged the American promise of equality, piercing a juror’s animus and bringing it within reach of the Court. His case established that protection of the jury’s black box decision making must yield to an even more fundamental protection: the equal protection of the law and the right to a fair and impartial trial by jury.