Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Appellate Division, First Department - Parkhouse V. Stringer, Alyssa Dunn
Appellate Division, First Department - Parkhouse V. Stringer, Alyssa Dunn
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Bakerian Response To Weinstein's Free Speech Theory, Anne Marie Lofaso
A Bakerian Response To Weinstein's Free Speech Theory, Anne Marie Lofaso
West Virginia Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law—First Amendment And Freedom Of Speech—The Constitutionality Of Arkansas’S Prohibition On Political Robocalls, Caleb J. Norris
Constitutional Law—First Amendment And Freedom Of Speech—The Constitutionality Of Arkansas’S Prohibition On Political Robocalls, Caleb J. Norris
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
The note first discusses the pros and cons of robocalls, concluding that certain restrictions on robocalls are desirable. Next, the note examines current constitutional case law governing the issue. Thereafter, the note illustrates how Arkansas's regulation on political robocalls would fail a First Amendment challenge as currently written. Accordingly, the note proposes a revision to the robocall statute that would most likely allow it to pass constitutional review.
The note concludes that the burdens resulting from robocalls are placed upon robocall recipients, opposing political campaigns (especially those that determine not to use them under current law), and unrelated third parties. …
Dueling Values: The Clash Of Cyber Suicide Speech And The First Amendment, Thea E. Potanos
Dueling Values: The Clash Of Cyber Suicide Speech And The First Amendment, Thea E. Potanos
Chicago-Kent Law Review
On March 15, 2011, William Melchert-Dinkel, a Minnesota nurse, was convicted of two counts of assisted suicide, based solely on things he said in emails and online chat rooms. This note examines whether cyber speech encouraging suicide, such as Melchert-Dinkel's, should be protected by the First Amendment. States have compelling interests in preserving life, preventing suicide, and protecting vulnerable persons from abuse, and the majority of them have assisted suicide statutes that could be applied to cyber-suicide speech. However, because cyber- suicide speech does not fit neatly into recognized categories of "low-value" or unprotected speech, punishment may be foreclosed by …
Will Free Speech Get A License To Drive In Florida?: A Proposal For Distinguishing Free Speech From Government Speech In Florida Specialty Plate Cases, Christopher Robert Dillingham Ii
Will Free Speech Get A License To Drive In Florida?: A Proposal For Distinguishing Free Speech From Government Speech In Florida Specialty Plate Cases, Christopher Robert Dillingham Ii
Florida A & M University Law Review
Specialty license plates for automobiles, which publish individual and special interest Free Speech, present a quagmire for the courts when analyzed through the lens of the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause. While citizens and groups can obtain personalized license plates that publish both symbolic and written speech, state governments often exercise strict editorial control over their license plates. This regulatory scenario raises the dual questions of who is speaking - the government or the private party - and how much constitutional power the government has to engage in viewpoint restriction in regulating that speech in this traditional government forum. The …
Too Narrow Of A Holding? How—And Perhaps Why—Chief Justice John Roberts Turned Snyder V. Phelps Into An Easy Case, Clay Calvert
Too Narrow Of A Holding? How—And Perhaps Why—Chief Justice John Roberts Turned Snyder V. Phelps Into An Easy Case, Clay Calvert
Oklahoma Law Review
This article analyzes the United States Supreme Court’s March 2011 decision in Snyder v. Phelps. Specifically, it demonstrates the narrow nature of the holding, and argues that while narrow framing, in the tradition of judicial minimalism, may have been a strategic move by Chief Justice John Roberts to obtain a decisive eight-justice majority, the resulting opinion failed to advance First Amendment jurisprudence significantly. Instead, the outcome simply—even predictably—fell in line with an established order of decisions. This article examines four tactics employed by the Chief Justice to narrow the case in such a way that its outcome was essentially …