Law Commons^™

The Invention Of First Amendment Federalism, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

When insisting that the Sedition Act of 1798 violated the First Amendment, Jeffersonian Republicans cast their argument in historical terms, claiming that the Speech and Press Clauses eliminated any federal power to restrict expression. Scholars, in turn, have generally accepted that Republicans had a consistent understanding of the First Amendment throughout the 1790s. But Founding Era constitutionalism was dynamic in practice, even while often conservative in rhetoric, and scholars have missed the striking novelty of the principal argument against the Sedition Act. Republicans had taken a rights provision and transformed it into a federalism rule.

Mostly ignored in the literature, …

Compelled Subsidies And Original Meaning, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

The rule against compelled subsidization of speech is at the forefront of modem First Amendment disputes. Challenges to mandatory union dues, laws preventing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and the federal "contraceptive mandate" have all featured variants of the anti-subsidization principle, reasoning that the government cannot compel people to support the objectionable activities of others. But the literature currently fails to evaluate modem compelled-subsidy doctrine in terms of the original meaning of the First Amendment. This Essay takes up that task.

Approaching any question of original meaning requires a willingness to encounter a constitutional world that looks very …

What Did The First Amendment Originally Mean?, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

The First Amendment says that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” For Americans, this language is familiar. But what exactly does it mean? How far do the speech and press clauses restrict governmental power? The founders, as we will see, answered these questions very differently than we typically do today. And the reasons why highlight fundamental shifts in American constitutional thought.

Natural Rights And The First Amendment, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court often claims that the First Amendment reflects an original judgment about the proper scope of expressive freedom. After a century of academic debate, however, the meanings of speech and press freedoms at the Founding remain remarkably hazy. Many scholars, often pointing to Founding Era sedition prosecutions, emphasize the limited scope of these rights. Others focus on the libertarian ideas that helped shape opposition to the Sedition Act of 1798. Still more claim that speech and press freedoms lacked any commonly accepted meaning. The relationship between speech and press freedoms is contested, too. Most scholars view these freedoms …

Indecency Four Years After Fox Television Stations: From Big Papi To A Porn Star, An Egregious Mess At The Fcc Continues, Clay Calvert, Minch Minchin, Keran Billaud, Kevin Bruckenstein, Tershone Phillips

University of Richmond Law Review

Using the WDBJ case as an analytical springboard, this article examines the tumultuous state of the FCC's indecency enforcement regime more than three years after the Supreme Court's June 2012 opinion in Fox Television Stations. Part I of this article briefly explores the missed First Amendment opportunities in Fox Television Stations, as well as some possible reasons why the Supreme Court chose to avoid the free-speech questions in that case." Part II addresses the FCC's decision in September 2012 to target only egregious instances of broadcast indecency and, in the process, to jettison hundreds of thousands of complaints that had …

Sexualization, Sex Discrimination, And Public School Dress Codes, Meredith Johnson Harbach

University of Richmond Law Review

This essay joins the conversation about sexualization, sex discrimination, and public school dress codes to situate current debates within in the broader cultural and legal landscapes in which they exist. My aim is not to answer definitively the questions I pose above. Rather, I ground the controversy in these broader contexts in order to better understand the stakes and to glean insights into how schools, students, and communities might better navigate dress code debates.

A New Approach To Nineteenth-Century Religious Exemption Cases, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

Scholars frequently cite early nineteenth-century cases to ascertain the original meaning of the Free Exercise Clause. Previous studies, however, have ignored crucial trends in those decisions, thus leading to mistaken emphasis on the denial of religious accommodation claims. This Note argues that prevailing theological views, skepticism of courtroom declarations of religious belief, and contemporary notions of judicial deference better explain nineteenth-century cases than does a wholesale rejection of judicially enforceable religious exemptions. This novel approach clarifies previously unexplained tensions in early free exercise opinions. It also suggests that the Supreme Court’s holding in Employment Division v. Smith is inconsistent with …

Playing Games With The First Amendment: Are Video Games Speech And May Minors' Access To Graphically Violent Video Games Be Restricted?, Gregory K. Laughlin

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Status Of Constitutional Religious Liberty At The End Of The Millennium, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

I have the privilege of introducing the 1998 Bums Lecture Symposium- Religious Liberty in the Next Millennium: Should We Amend the Religion Clauses of the United States Constitution? My role in this Symposium is to acquaint you with the religion clauses of the Constitution- where they came from- where they've been- and where they seem to be today. Our Symposium contributors, Professors Kent Greenawalt and Robert George will discuss just where they think the religion clauses should go in the future.

Power And The Subject Of Religion, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Under the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Nevertheless, congressional actors have on occasion enacted laws that expressly make religion the subject of legislation. Many scholars justify these laws on the grounds that Congress at the time of the Founding had an implied power to legislate on religion if necessary and proper to an enumerated end.

Professor Lash argues that the "implied power" theory cannot withstand historical scrutiny. Whatever "implied power" arguments may have emanated from the original Constitution, those arguments were foreclosed by the adoption of the …

Civilizing Religion, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

Is it appropriate to restrict abortion at any stage in pregnancy on the ground that human life is sacred? Should the public square be open to biblical arguments against homosexuality? Or, to frame the issue in a more scholarly fashion: What role may religious arguments play, if any, either in public debate about what political choices to make or as the private basis of a political choice? In his recent book, Religion in Politics: Constitutional and Moral Perspectives, Michael Perry addresses these questions as a matter of constitutional law and political morality. Perry has been down this road before, most …

The Second Adoption Of The Establishment Clause: The Rise Of The Non-Establishment Principle, Kurt T. Lash

Law Faculty Publications

In the 70 years since Gitlow first incorporated the First Amendment protections of speech and press against the states, the Establishment Clause has been a boon to incorporation's enemies and an embarrassment to its friends. Scholars who make the historical case for general incorporation either ignore, or carefully distinguish, the case of the Establishment Clause. Anti-incorporationists, on the other hand, use the case against incorporation of the Establishment Clause as their cause celebre. In fact, so wonderfully ambiguous is the history surrounding this opening line of the Bill of Rights that originalists use it to attack incorporation, and nonoriginalists use …

The Case Against A Right To Religion-Based Exemptions, Ellis M. West

Political Science Faculty Publications

When, if ever, does the free exercise clause of the first amendment give an individual or organization the right to disobey with impunity a valid law of the state? This question is being discussed with increasing frequency and intensity because of the growing number of persons and groups who are going to the courts and claiming such a right on the grounds that the application of certain laws to them would burden their free exercise of religion. Almost all the individuals and some of the groups who claim such a right do so because the laws to which they object …