Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 39
Full-Text Articles in Law
You Can’T Say That!: Public Forum Doctrine And Viewpoint Discrimination In The Social Media Era, Micah Telegen
You Can’T Say That!: Public Forum Doctrine And Viewpoint Discrimination In The Social Media Era, Micah Telegen
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The growing prevalence of privately-owned social media platforms is changing the way Americans and their governments communicate. This shift offers new opportunities, but also requires a reinterpretation of the First Amendment’s proscription of government limitations of speech. The public forum doctrine and its proscription of viewpoint discrimination seem particularly stretched by the digital revolution and the development of social media. In ongoing cases, litigants and courts have invoked the doctrine to limit the government’s ability to ‘block’ those who comment critically on government pages—much to the chagrin of those who note the private status of the companies hosting the pages …
How Elonis Failed To Clarify The Analysis Of "True Threats" In Social Media Cases And The Subsequent Need For Congressional Response, Jessica L. Opila
How Elonis Failed To Clarify The Analysis Of "True Threats" In Social Media Cases And The Subsequent Need For Congressional Response, Jessica L. Opila
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Social media and other internet communications have altered the way people communicate with one another, including the way people threaten one another. In 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Elonis v. United States, which imposed a heightened mental state requirement for federal prosecutions of threats issued in interstate commerce. Although the statute, 18 U.S.C. § 875(c), has no mental state requirement, the Supreme Court held that, consistent with the principles of criminal law, only those with guilty minds should be convicted and thus some showing of subjective intent is required. The opinion did not name the requisite mental …
In All Fairness: Using Political Broadcast Access Doctrine To Tailor Public Campaign Fund Matching, Andrew V. Moshirnia, Aaron T. Dozeman
In All Fairness: Using Political Broadcast Access Doctrine To Tailor Public Campaign Fund Matching, Andrew V. Moshirnia, Aaron T. Dozeman
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Recent United States Supreme Court decisions have undermined the viability of campaign public financing systems, a vital tool for fighting political corruption. First, Citizens United v. FEC allowed privately financed candidates and independent groups to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaigning. Publicly financed candidates now risk being vastly outspent. Second, Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom PAC v. Bennett invalidated a proportional fund matching system whereby privately financed candidates’ or independent groups’ spending triggered funds to publicly funded candidates. These decisions effectuate a libertarian speech doctrine: all speakers, individual or corporate, must be absolutely unburdened. To comply with this approach, …
No More Shortcuts: Protect Cell Site Location Data With A Warrant Requirement, Lauren E. Babst
No More Shortcuts: Protect Cell Site Location Data With A Warrant Requirement, Lauren E. Babst
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
In modern society, the cell phone has become a virtual extension of most Americans, managing all kinds of personal and business matters. Modern cell tower technology allows cell service providers to accumulate a wealth of individuals’ location information while they use their cell phones, and such data is available for law enforcement to obtain without a warrant. This is problematic under the Fourth Amendment, which protects reasonable expectations of privacy. Under the Katz two-prong test, (1) individuals have an actual, subjective expectation of privacy in their cell site location data, and (2) society is prepared to acknowledge that expectation as …
Rethinking Reporter's Privilege, Ronnell Andersen Jones
Rethinking Reporter's Privilege, Ronnell Andersen Jones
Michigan Law Review
Forty years ago, in Branzburg v. Hayes, the Supreme Court made its first and only inquiry into the constitutional protection of the relationship between a reporter and a confidential source. This case - decided at a moment in American history in which the role of an investigative press, and of information provided by confidential sources, was coming to the forefront of public consciousness in a new and significant way - produced a reporter-focused "privilege" that is now widely regarded to be both doctrinally questionable and deeply inconsistent in application. Although the post-Branzburg privilege has been recognized as flawed in a …
A Barometer Of Freedom Of The Press: The Opinions Of Mr. Justice White , Michael J. Armstrong
A Barometer Of Freedom Of The Press: The Opinions Of Mr. Justice White , Michael J. Armstrong
Pepperdine Law Review
Since the Zurcher v. Stanford Daily decision which was authored by Justice Byron F. White, the news media has become increasingly concerned with its' first amendment protections from governmental searches. Since Justice White has been the voice of the United States Supreme Court on this very issue, the author submits that an examination of Justice White's media related opinions can serve as a "barometer" for the constitutional protections of the news media. The author examines the use of Justice White to the Supreme Court, his staunch adherence to stare decisis, and the historical foundation of the first amendment as they …
Televising The Supreme Court: Why Legislation Fails, R. Patrick Thornberry
Televising The Supreme Court: Why Legislation Fails, R. Patrick Thornberry
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Unfit For Prime Time: Why Cable Television Regulations Cannot Perform Trinko's 'Antitrust Function', Keith Klovers
Unfit For Prime Time: Why Cable Television Regulations Cannot Perform Trinko's 'Antitrust Function', Keith Klovers
Michigan Law Review
Until recently, regulation and antitrust law operated in tandem to safeguard competition in regulated industries. In three recent decisions-Trinko, Credit Suisse, and Linkline-the Supreme Court limited the operation of the antitrust laws when regulation "performs the antitrust function." This Note argues that cable programming regulations-which are in some respects factually similar to the telecommunications regulations at issue in Trinko and Linkline-do not perform the antitrust function because they cannot deter anticompetitive conduct. As a result, Trinko and its siblings should not foreclose antitrust claims for damages that arise out of certain cable programming disputes.
The Journalism Ratings Board: An Incentive-Based Approach To Cable News Accountability, Andrew Selbst
The Journalism Ratings Board: An Incentive-Based Approach To Cable News Accountability, Andrew Selbst
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The American establishment media is in crisis. With newsmakers primarily driven by profit, sensationalism and partisanship shape news coverage at the expense of information necessary for effective self-government. Focused on cable news in particular this Note proposes a Journalism Ratings Board to periodically rate news programs based on principles of good journalism. The Board will publish periodic reports and display the news programs' ratings during the programs themselves, similar to parental guidelines for entertainment programs. In a political and legal climate hostile to command-and-control regulation, such an incentive-based approach will help cable news fulfill the democratic function of the press.
Linkline's Institutional Suspicions, Daniel A. Crane
Linkline's Institutional Suspicions, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
Antitrust scholars are having fun again. Not so long ago, they were the poor, redheaded stepchildren of the legal academy, either pining for the older days of rigorous antitrust enforcement or trying to kill off what was left of the enterprise. Other law professors felt sorry for them, ignored them, or both. But now antitrust is making a comeback of sorts. In one heady week in May of 2009, a front-page story in the New York Times reported the dramatic decision of Christine Varney-the Obama Administration's new Antitrust Division head at the Department of Justice-to jettison the entire report on …
Section 1: Moot Court, Fcc V. Fox Television Stations, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Section 1: Moot Court, Fcc V. Fox Television Stations, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School
Supreme Court Preview
No abstract provided.
Will It Make My Job Easier, Or What's In It For Me?, Kenneth N. Flaxman
Will It Make My Job Easier, Or What's In It For Me?, Kenneth N. Flaxman
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Putting aside philosophical questions about public access to government proceedings—what we now call “transparency”—and without regard to whether televising Supreme Court arguments is a logical extension of the common law’s “absolute personal right of reasonable access to court files” as described in 1977 by the Seventh Circuit in Rush v. United States, my real concern about whether Supreme Court arguments should be televised is somewhat narcissistic. Will it make my job—as a plaintiff’s civil rights lawyer who dabbles in criminal defense and post-conviction matters and who has had five adventures as “arguing counsel” in the Supreme Court—easier? I explain below …
Constitutional Etiquette And The Fate Of "Supreme Court Tv", Bruce Peabody
Constitutional Etiquette And The Fate Of "Supreme Court Tv", Bruce Peabody
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In traditional media outlets, on the Internet, and throughout the halls of Congress, debate about whether the Supreme Court should be required to televise its public proceedings is becoming more audible and focused. To date, these discussions have included such topics as the potential effects of broadcasting the Court, the constitutionality of Senator Arlen Specter’s current congressional initiative, S. 344, and how the public would use or abuse televised sessions of our highest tribunal.
The Right Legislation For The Wrong Reasons, Tony Mauro
The Right Legislation For The Wrong Reasons, Tony Mauro
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Senator Arlen Specter took a bold and long-overdue step on January 22, 2007, when he introduced legislation that would require the Supreme Court to allow television coverage of its proceedings. But instead of making his case with a straightforward appeal to the public’s right to know, Specter has introduced arguments in favor of his bill that seem destined to antagonize the Court, drive it into the shadows, or both. Chances of passage might improve if Specter adjusts his tactics.
Gee Whiz, The Sky Is Falling!, Boyce F. Martin Jr.
Gee Whiz, The Sky Is Falling!, Boyce F. Martin Jr.
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
I am reminded of Chicken Little’s famous mantra as I listen to some Supreme Court Justices’ reactions to the prospect of televising oral arguments. Their fears—such as Justice Kennedy’s warning that allowing cameras in the courtroom may change the Court’s dynamics—are, in my opinion, overblown. And some comments, most notably Justice Souter’s famous exclamation in a 1996 House subcommittee hearing that “the day you see a camera come into our courtroom, it’s going to roll over my dead body,” make it sound as if the Justices have forgotten that our nation’s court system belongs to the public, not merely the …
Granting Certiorari To Video Recording But Not To Televising, Scott C. Wilcox
Granting Certiorari To Video Recording But Not To Televising, Scott C. Wilcox
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
Cameras are an understandable yet inapt target for Supreme Court Justices apprehensive about televising the high Court’s proceedings. Notwithstanding Justice Souter’s declaration to a congressional subcommittee in 1996 that cameras will have to roll over his dead body to enter the Court, the Justices’ public statements suggest that their objections are to televising—not to cameras. In fact, welcoming cameras to video record Court proceedings for archival purposes will serve the Justices’ interests well. Video recording can forestall legislation recently introduced in both houses of Congress that would require the Court to televise its proceedings. The Court’s desired result—the legislation disappearing …
C-Span's Long And Winding Road To A Still Un-Televised Supreme Court, Bruce D. Collins
C-Span's Long And Winding Road To A Still Un-Televised Supreme Court, Bruce D. Collins
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
In 2005 when Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) first proposed legislation requiring the Supreme Court of the United States to televise its oral arguments, he resuscitated a twenty-plus-years long effort by several news organizations to achieve the same goal. For at least that long, C-SPAN has been ready to provide the same kind of video coverage of the federal judiciary as it has been providing of the Congress and the president. If cameras are ever permitted in the high Court’s chamber, C-SPAN will televise every minute of every oral argument, frequently on a live basis, and will do so in its …
Televising The Court: A Category Mistake (Symposium On Televising The Supreme Court), Christina B. Whitman
Televising The Court: A Category Mistake (Symposium On Televising The Supreme Court), Christina B. Whitman
Articles
The idea of televising Supreme Court oral arguments is undeniably appealing. Consequently, it is not surprising that reporters and politicians have been pressuring the Court to take this step. The other branches have been media-friendly for years, and Supreme Court arguments are already open to the public. Why should those of us who neither reside in Washington, D.C. nor have the time to attend Court proceedings be asked to depend on reporters for descriptions of the event? Even lower courts permit cameras. There is an understandable hunger for anything that will help us understand these nine individuals who have so …
Covering Women And Violence: Media Treatment Of Vawa's Civil Rights Remedy, Sarah F. Russell
Covering Women And Violence: Media Treatment Of Vawa's Civil Rights Remedy, Sarah F. Russell
Michigan Journal of Gender & Law
This Article analyzes how newspapers described and characterized the civil rights provision over the past decade and shaped the public discourse about the law. The author examines how lower federal courts, and eventually the Supreme Court, categorized the VAWA remedy when deciding whether Congress had acted within its commerce powers. After considering why there may have been resistance in the press and in the courts to VAWA's categorization of violence against women as a civil rights issue, the author concludes by examining the remedies that have been introduced at the state and local level for victims of gender-motivated violence, and …
Criminalization Of True Anonymity In Cyberspace, The, George F. Du Pont
Criminalization Of True Anonymity In Cyberspace, The, George F. Du Pont
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The question of whether a state or the federal government can create a narrowly tailored restriction on cyberspace anonymity without violating the First Amendment remains unresolved[...]The Supreme Court has not directly addressed the issue, but it may soon consider the constitutionality of criminalizing certain kinds of cyber-anonymity in light of the unique nature of cyberspace. This comment explores the various forms of anonymity, examines the First Amendment status of anonymity in and outside of cyberspace, analyzes relevant scholarly commentary, and concludes that a narrowly tailored legislative restriction on "true" anonymity in cyberspace would not violate the First Amendment.
Incitement To Violence On The World Wide Web: Can Web Publishers Seek First Amendment Refuge?, Lonn Weissblum
Incitement To Violence On The World Wide Web: Can Web Publishers Seek First Amendment Refuge?, Lonn Weissblum
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The purpose of this comment is to analyze the potential First Amendment implications of the appearance of bomb-making instructions on the Web in the United States. Moreover, this comment will ultimately consider the notion that "because Brandenburg allows consideration of all the unique characteristics of the Web, there is no reason to formulate new jurisprudence merely because of new technology." Part II examines the seminal cases in the area of speech action, including Schenck v. United States, Hess v. Indiana, and Brandenburg v. Ohio, and the adulations and criticisms that resulted from these cases. Part III discusses the civil cases …
Turner Broadcasting, The First Amendment , And The New Electronic Delivery Systems, Henry Geller
Turner Broadcasting, The First Amendment , And The New Electronic Delivery Systems, Henry Geller
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
After ducking the issue of the First Amendment status of cable television for years, the United States Supreme Court rendered its most important decision concerning the regulation of the new electronic media in Turner Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC. Turner involved the constitutionality of the "must-carry" provisions of the 1992 Cable Act (the "Act" or "Cable Act") which require cable systems to carry specified local broadcast television stations. While cable television began over four decades ago as a community antenna service, it changed drastically after the advent of satellite in the mid-1970's to also provide scores of satellite-delivered programs and to …
Starting From Scratch: The First Amendment Reporter-Source Privilege And The Doctrine Of Incidental Restrictions, Marcus A. Asner
Starting From Scratch: The First Amendment Reporter-Source Privilege And The Doctrine Of Incidental Restrictions, Marcus A. Asner
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note examines reporters' claims to a First Amendment reporter-source privilege in light of First Amendment doctrine as a whole. Part I briefly explains the current state of reporter-source privileges and the policies behind them. Part II then attempts to identify doctrinal support for the press's claim to a First Amendment privilege. Part II rejects the notion that the First Amendment affords special protection to the press as an institution. A reporter's status as a member of the institutional media is not irrelevant, however, and the well-established principle that the government may not target or single out the press for …
Actual Malice: Twenty-Five Years After Times V. Sullivan, David G. Wille
Actual Malice: Twenty-Five Years After Times V. Sullivan, David G. Wille
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Actual Malice: Twenty-Five Years After Times v. Sullivan. by W. Wat Hopkins
The Supreme Court In Politics., Terrance Sandalow
The Supreme Court In Politics., Terrance Sandalow
Reviews
Despite all that has been written about the bitter struggle initiated by President Reagan's nomination of Robert Bork to a seat on the Supreme Court, its most remarkable feature, that it was waged over a judicial appointment, has drawn relatively little comment. Two hundred years after the Philadelphia Convention, Hamilton's "least dangerous" branch - least dangerous because it would have "no influence over either the sword or the purse, no direction either of the strength or the wealth of the society, and can take no active resolution whatever"'-had come to occupy so important a place in the nation's political life …
The Apologetics Of Suppression: The Regulation Of Pornography As Act And Idea, Steven G. Gey
The Apologetics Of Suppression: The Regulation Of Pornography As Act And Idea, Steven G. Gey
Michigan Law Review
The first three parts of this article discuss in detail the relationship between the Supreme Court's obscenity rulings and the academic theories that have been offered to bolster the conclusions reached by the Court in this area. Part IV of the article considers a contrary theory of free expression that requires constitutional protection for the dissemination and possession of pornography. In this section I argue that the present efforts to ban pornography are directly linked to a tolerance model of free expression. The tolerance model, which is usually contrasted with an analytical approach characterized by Holmesian skepticism, necessarily relies upon …
The Right To Speak, The Right To Hear, And The Right Not To Hear: The Technological Resolution To The Cable/Pornography Debate, Michael I. Meyerson
The Right To Speak, The Right To Hear, And The Right Not To Hear: The Technological Resolution To The Cable/Pornography Debate, Michael I. Meyerson
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Article concludes that the power of government to regulate cable pornography is limited to that which is legally obscene. Part I reviews Supreme Court cases delineating the relationship between the rights of privacy in the home and of freedom of speech. Part II demonstrates that the technology of cable television provides the solution to the pornography dilemma. Cable television preserves both privacy and speech interests because individual subscribers can be given the physical means to block out programming they find personally offensive without affecting the ability of others to receive that programming. Where such accommodation of interests is permissible, …
The Public's Right To Know: The Supreme Court As Pandora?, Loren P. Beth
The Public's Right To Know: The Supreme Court As Pandora?, Loren P. Beth
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Public's Right to Know: The Supreme Court and the First Amendment by David M. O'Brien
The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint Since The Pentagon Papers, James L. Oakes
The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint Since The Pentagon Papers, James L. Oakes
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The purpose of this speech is to examine how the doctrine against prior restraint has evolved since the Pentagon Papers case. I intend to demonstrate that while traditional antipathy to prior restraint has for the most part remained strong, several recent cases foreshadow a dangerous expansion of well-established exceptions to the doctrine. To understand fully the significance of these recent cases, I will begin this lecture with a general discussion of the historical origins of the doctrine against prior restraint. I will then proceed with a critical overview of the landmark Pentagon Papers case, more formally called New York Times …
The Privacy Protection Act Of 1980: Curbing Unrestricted Third-Party Searches In The Wake Of Zurcher V. Stanford Daily, Jose M. Sariego
The Privacy Protection Act Of 1980: Curbing Unrestricted Third-Party Searches In The Wake Of Zurcher V. Stanford Daily, Jose M. Sariego
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This article analyzes the Privacy Protection Act as a response to Zurcher. Part I discusses the Zurcher decision and its effect on First and Fourth Amendment rights, as well as its impact on state testimonial privileges. Part II critically examines key features of the statute, focusing on the parties and materials protected, the police practices regulated, the remedies provided for violations, and the Act's constitutional underpinnings. Part II also offers suggestions for remedying the problems the Act currently presents. The article concludes that the Privacy Protection Act, while a necessary first step to minimizing the impact of Zurcher, is …