Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Criminal Law

2017

Criminal law; symposium; communications law; international law; first amendment

File Type

Articles 1 - 11 of 11

Full-Text Articles in Law

Terrorists Are Always Muslim But Never White: At The Intersection Of Critical Race Theory And Propaganda, Caroline Mala Corbin Nov 2017

Terrorists Are Always Muslim But Never White: At The Intersection Of Critical Race Theory And Propaganda, Caroline Mala Corbin

Fordham Law Review

When you hear the word “terrorist,” who do you picture? Chances are, it is not a white person. In the United States, two common though false narratives about terrorists who attack America abound. We see them on television, in the movies, on the news, and, currently, in the Trump administration. The first is that “terrorists are always (brown) Muslims.” The second is that “white people are never terrorists.” Different strands of critical race theory can help us understand these two narratives. One strand examines the role of unconscious cognitive biases in the production of stereotypes, such as the stereotype of …


Free Speech And The Confluence Of National Security And Internet Exceptionalism, Alan K. Chen Nov 2017

Free Speech And The Confluence Of National Security And Internet Exceptionalism, Alan K. Chen

Fordham Law Review

In this Article, I argue that, notwithstanding these contemporary developments, the Court got it mostly right in Brandenburg. Or, I want to at least suggest that it is premature to reconstruct the Brandenburg test to address perceived changes in our global environment. For the most part, Brandenburg has succeeded in mediating the balance between protecting political or ideological advocacy and enabling the government to regulate actual incitement, even in the contemporary era. Moreover, I argue that society should be especially wary of calls to narrow Brandenburg’s speech-protective standard because such changes might be significantly influenced by the confluence of two …


The Internet Will Not Break: Denying Bad Samaritans § 230 Immunity, Danielle Keats Citron, Benjamin Wittes Nov 2017

The Internet Will Not Break: Denying Bad Samaritans § 230 Immunity, Danielle Keats Citron, Benjamin Wittes

Fordham Law Review

Section 230 is overdue for a rethinking. If courts do not construe the scope of federal immunity to avoid injustice, we argue, Congress should amend the law. This is not to discount the important role that the immunity provision has played over the past twenty years. Far from it. Section 230 immunity has enabled innovation and expression beyond the imagination of the operators of early bulletin boards and computer service providers the provision was designed to protect. But its overbroad interpretation has left victims of online abuse with no leverage against site operators whose business models facilitate abuse. This state …


The Role Of Internet Intermediaries In Tackling Terrorism Online, Raphael Cohen-Almagor Nov 2017

The Role Of Internet Intermediaries In Tackling Terrorism Online, Raphael Cohen-Almagor

Fordham Law Review

Gatekeeping is defined as the work of third parties “who are able to disrupt misconduct by withholding their cooperation from wrongdoers.”1 Internet intermediaries need to be far more proactive as gatekeepers than they are now. Socially responsible measures can prevent the translation of violent thoughts into violent actions. Designated monitoring mechanisms can potentially prevent such unfortunate events. This Article suggests an approach that harnesses the strengths and capabilities of the public and private sectors in offering practical solutions to pressing problems. It proposes that internet intermediaries should fight stringently against terror and further argues that a responsible gatekeeping approach is …


Terrorist Advocacy And Exceptional Circumstances, David S. Han Nov 2017

Terrorist Advocacy And Exceptional Circumstances, David S. Han

Fordham Law Review

This Article proceeds as follows. Part I discusses the harmful effects of terrorist advocacy and outlines the present doctrinal treatment of such speech. Part II discusses the issue of exceptional circumstances and highlights the two approaches courts might take to account for them: applying strict scrutiny to the case at hand or broadly reformulating the First Amendment’s doctrinal boundaries. Part III sets forth my central thesis: courts should adhere to case-by-case strict scrutiny analysis, rather than broad doctrinal reformulation, as the initial means of accounting for exceptional circumstances with respect to terrorist advocacy. This approach reflects the vital importance of …


Free Speech And National Security Bootstraps, Heidi Kitrosser Nov 2017

Free Speech And National Security Bootstraps, Heidi Kitrosser

Fordham Law Review

It is troubling that courts treat administrative designations—specifically, both FTO determinations and information classification—as bootstraps by which to yank speech restrictions from the clutches of probing judicial scrutiny. This Article builds on existing scholarly critiques to identify and examine the common thread of national security bootstrapping that runs through both sets of cases. The hope is that in so doing, some greater light may be shed both on the cases themselves and, more broadly, on the costs and benefits of judicial deference to executive national security claims where civil rights and civil liberties are at stake.


Entertaining Satan: Why We Tolerate Terrorist Incitement, Andrew Koppelman Nov 2017

Entertaining Satan: Why We Tolerate Terrorist Incitement, Andrew Koppelman

Fordham Law Review

Words are dangerous. That is why governments sometimes want to suppress speech. The law of free speech reflects a settled decision that, at the time that law was adopted, the dangers were worth tolerating. But people keep dreaming up nasty new things to do with speech. Recently, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and other terrorist organizations have employed a small army of Iagos on the internet to recruit new instruments of destruction. Some of what they have posted is protected speech under present First Amendment law. In response, scholars have suggested that there should be some new …


Government Speech And The War On Terror, Helen Norton Nov 2017

Government Speech And The War On Terror, Helen Norton

Fordham Law Review

This Article examines how the government’s speech in the War on Terror can threaten free speech, equal protection, and due process values. It focuses primarily on the constitutional harms threatened by the government’s speech itself (what some call a form of “soft law”), rather than on situations in which the government’s speech may be evidence of a constitutionally impermissible motive for its “hard law” actions.


Terrorizing Advocacy And The First Amendment: Free Expression And The Fallacy Of Mutual Exclusivity, Martin H. Redish, Matthew Fisher Nov 2017

Terrorizing Advocacy And The First Amendment: Free Expression And The Fallacy Of Mutual Exclusivity, Martin H. Redish, Matthew Fisher

Fordham Law Review

Traditional free speech doctrine is inadequate to account for modern terrorist speech. Unprotected threats and substantially protected lawful advocacy are not mutually exclusive. This Article proposes recognizing a new hybrid category of speech called “terrorizing advocacy.” This is a type of traditionally protected public advocacy of unlawful conduct that simultaneously exhibits the unprotected pathologies of a true threat. This Article explains why this new category confounds existing First Amendment doctrine and details a proposed model for how the doctrine should be reshaped.


The Internet As Marketplace Of Madness— And A Terrorist’S Best Friend, Thane Rosenbaum Nov 2017

The Internet As Marketplace Of Madness— And A Terrorist’S Best Friend, Thane Rosenbaum

Fordham Law Review

The panel I was assigned to, for this distinguished gathering of scholars at Fordham Law School, where I had previously been a professor for twentythree years, was given the name, “Caution Against Overreaching.” Overreaching and the caution it occasions, in this case, refer to the First Amendment, a uniquely American absolutist, legalistic obsession. For many who fixate on such matters, the government must never be allowed to trample upon the unfettered free speech rights guaranteed under America’s first, and most favorite, Amendment.


Social Media Accountability For Terrorist Propaganda, Alexander Tsesis Nov 2017

Social Media Accountability For Terrorist Propaganda, Alexander Tsesis

Fordham Law Review

Terrorist organizations have found social media websites to be invaluable for disseminating ideology, recruiting terrorists, and planning operations. National and international leaders have repeatedly pointed out the dangers terrorists pose to ordinary people and state institutions. In the United States, the federal Communications Decency Act’s § 230 provides social networking websites with immunity against civil law suits. Litigants have therefore been unsuccessful in obtaining redress against internet companies who host or disseminate third-party terrorist content. This Article demonstrates that § 230 does not bar private parties from recovery if they can prove that a social media company had received complaints …