Law Commons^™

Weapons Of Mass Distortion: Applying The Principles Of The Fcc’S News Distortion Doctrine To Undisclosed Financial Conflicts Of Interest In Corporate News Media’S Military Coverage, Charles L. Bonani

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

This Note offers a new conception of news distortion in mass media. It explores the intentions behind the FCC’s News Distortion Doctrine and analyzes its primarily dormant status throughout its existence. This Note then examines televised media coverage of U.S. military actions and identifies undisclosed financial conflicts of interests throughout this coverage. In examining these undisclosed conflicts and the reasons behind them, this Note explains why they constitute news distortion under the FCC’s definition, and why the principles behind the Doctrine are implicated. This Note then proposes the FCC promulgate a disclosure rule to remedy the undisclosed financial conflicts of …

Hogan V. Gawker: A Leg-Drop On The First Amendment, Aubrey Morin

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Grand Theory Or Discrete Proposal? Religious Accommodations And Health Related Harms, James M. Oleske Jr.

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

More than a quarter-century has passed since the Supreme Court decided in Employment Division v. Smith that religious accommodations are primarily a matter of legislative grace, not constitutional right. In that time, barrels of ink have been spilled over the merits of the Smith decision. But comparatively little attention has been given to the issue of how legislatures and other political actors should exercise their discretion to grant or deny specific religious accommodations. In their article To Accommodate or Not to Accommodate: (When) Should the State Regulate Religion to Protect the Rights of Children and Third Parties?, Professor Hillel …

The “Ample Alternative Channels” Flaw In First Amendment Doctrine, Enrique Armijo

Washington and Lee Law Review

In reviewing a content-neutral regulation affecting speech, courts ask if the regulation leaves open “ample alternative channels of communication” for the restricted speaker’s expression. Substitutability is the underlying rationale. If the message could have been expressed in some other legal way, the ample alternative channels requirement is met. The court then deems the restriction’s harm to the speaker’s expressive right as de minimis and upholds the law. For decades, courts and free speech scholars have assumed the validity of this principle. It has set First Amendment jurisprudence on the wrong course. Permitting a speech restriction because the speaker could have …

To Accommodate Or Not To Accommodate: (When) Should The State Regulate Religion To Protect The Rights Of Children And Third Parties?, Hillel Y. Levin, Allan J. Jacobs, Kavita Shah Arora

Washington and Lee Law Review

When should we accommodate religious practices? When should we demand that religious groups instead conform to social or legal norms? Who should make these decisions, and how? These questions lie at the very heart of our contemporary debates in the field of Law and Religion.

Particularly thorny issues arise where religious practices may impose health-related harm to children within a religious group or to third parties. Unfortunately, legislators, courts, scholars, ethicists, and medical practitioners have not offered a consistent way to analyze such cases, so the law is inconsistent. This Article suggests, first, that the lack of consistency is a …

Frank Miller’S Sin City College Football: A Game To Die For And Other Lessons About The Right Of Publicity And Video Games, Jordan M. Blanke

Washington and Lee Law Review

The challenge of finding a workable solution for applying the right of publicity is a formidable one because it implicates not only a delicate balance between First Amendment rights and the rights of publicity, but also the complications of varying state laws. The best of the tests developed by the courts so far—the transformative use test—was borrowed from copyright law and itself reflects a careful balance between First Amendment and copyright interests. Additionally, because of dramatic progress in technology, it is likely that in the near future this balancing will often involve not only the rights of publicity and the …

The Lawless Rule Of The Norm In The Government Religious Speech Cases, Kyle Langvardt

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

What You Sign Up For: Public University Restrictions On “Professional” Student Speech After Tatro V. University Of Minnesota, William Bush

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment: Religious Freedom For All, Including Muslims, Asma Uddin

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Breach Of Confidence From The U.S. Experience, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

Not available.

The Fact-Conjecture Framework In U.S. Libel Law: Four Problems, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

A requirement of U.S. defamation law is that an actionable statement be factual in nature, but courts since Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (1990), have had considerable difficulty in distinguishing factual from non-factual statements and in articulating the value of non-factual public discourse in all its diversity. This Article reviews four topics - intent, context, conjecture, and hyperbole - that have been particularly troublesome to courts. It argues for a fresh appraisal of Justice Brennan's dissenting opinion in Milkovich and brings into the conversation the works of several current political theorists on the contributions of passionate political …

Revisiting The American Action For Public Disclosure Of Facts, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

None available.

Interpretation And Interdependence: How Judges Use The Avoidance Canon In Separation Of Powers Cases, Brian C. Murchison

Scholarly Articles

None available.