Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Divide, Christopher W. Schmidt
The Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Divide, Christopher W. Schmidt
All Faculty Scholarship
Contemporary legal discourse differentiates “civil rights” from “civil liberties.” The former are generally understood as protections against discriminatory treatment, the latter as freedom from oppressive government authority. This Essay explains how this differentiation arose and considers its consequences.
Although there is a certain inherent logic to the civil rights-civil liberties divide, it in fact is the product of the unique circumstances of a particular moment in history. In the early years of the Cold War, liberal anticommunists sought to distinguish their incipient interest in the cause of racial equality from their belief that national security required limitations on the speech …
Civil Liberties In Uncivil Times: The Perilous Quest To Preserve American Freedoms, Kenneth Lasson
Civil Liberties In Uncivil Times: The Perilous Quest To Preserve American Freedoms, Kenneth Lasson
All Faculty Scholarship
The perilous quest to preserve civil liberties in uncivil times is not an easy one, but the wisdom of Benjamin Franklin should remain a beacon: "Societies that trade liberty for security end often with neither." Part I of this article is a brief history of civil liberties in America during past conflicts. Part II describes various actions taken by the government to conduct the war on terrorism - including invasions of privacy, immigration policies, deportations, profiling, pre-trial detentions, and secret military tribunals. Part III analyzes the serious Constitutional questions raised by the government's actions in fighting terrorism. The thesis throughout …
To Stimulate, Provoke, Or Incite? Hate Speech And The First Amendment, Kenneth Lasson
To Stimulate, Provoke, Or Incite? Hate Speech And The First Amendment, Kenneth Lasson
All Faculty Scholarship
If protecting freedom of speech is one of mankind's noblest pursuits, then restricting it is the most difficult. Yet limit we must: even the purest civil libertarian will concede that false shouts of fire cannot be countenanced nor broadcasts of wartime troop movements; even those who object to obscenity laws recognize the need for enabling redress of libel; and even those who would protect the right to be insulting do not defend inflammatory words spit out nose-to-nose. Now a spate of "speech codes" on college campuses has once again brought the first amendment to the fore, part of a simmering …