Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
January 6, Ambiguously Inciting Speech, And The Overt-Acts Rule, Alan Z. Rozenshtein, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
January 6, Ambiguously Inciting Speech, And The Overt-Acts Rule, Alan Z. Rozenshtein, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
Faculty Scholarship
A prosecution of Donald Trump for his role in the January 6 attack on the Capitol would have to address whether the First Amendment protects the inflammatory remarks he made at the “Stop the Steal” rally. A prosecution based solely on the content of Trump’s speech—whether for incitement, insurrection, or obstruction—would face serious constitutional difficulties under Brandenburg v. Ohio’s dual requirements of intent and likely imminence. But a prosecution need not rely solely on the content of Trump’s speech. It can also look to Trump’s actions: his order to the remove the magnetometers from the entrances to the rally and …
Keynote Address, Justin Hansford
Keynote Address, Justin Hansford
Seattle University Law Review
Keynote Address by Justin Hansford
The Long Shadow Of United States V. Rosenberg: A Biographical Perspective On The Hon. Irving Robert Kaufman, Rodger D. Citron
The Long Shadow Of United States V. Rosenberg: A Biographical Perspective On The Hon. Irving Robert Kaufman, Rodger D. Citron
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Freedom To Morph? An Analysis Of Morphed Imagery, Child Pornography, And The First Amendment, Katie H. Jung
Freedom To Morph? An Analysis Of Morphed Imagery, Child Pornography, And The First Amendment, Katie H. Jung
Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology
This article examines the current law related to child pornography and how it leaves a gap for morphed imagery to flourish. The jurisprudence in this area is insufficient to keep up with the changing technology which allows children to be portrayed in morphed imagery and argues that this should not fall within First Amendment protection. The Supreme Court has made it clear that protecting children is an exceedingly important interest and that traditional child pornography falls outside of what was traditionally considered to be protected First Amendment speech. This article argues that the Circuit Split, should the Supreme Court take …