Law Commons^™

Fake News And The First Amendment: Reconciling A Disconnect Between Theory And Doctrine, Clay Calvert, Stephanie Mcneff, Austin Vining, Sebastian Zarate

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article analyzes calls for regulating so-called “fake news” through the lens of both traditional theories of free expression – namely, the marketplace of ideas and democratic self-governance – and two well-established First Amendment doctrines, strict scrutiny and underinclusivity. The Article argues there is, at first glance, a seeming disconnect between theory and doctrine when it comes to either censoring or safeguarding fake news. The Article contends, however, that a structural rights interpretation of the First Amendment offers a viable means of reconciling theory and doctrine. A structural rights approach focuses on the dangers of collective power in defining the …

Privacy Of Information And Dna Testing Kits, Shanna Raye Mason

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

In modern times, consumers desire for more control over their own health and healthcare. With this growing interest of control, direct to consumer DNA testing kits have never been more popular. However, many consumers are unaware of the potential privacy concerns associated with such use. This comment examines the popularity and privacy risks that are likely unknown to the individual consumer. This comment also addresses the shortcomings of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), as well as the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) in regard to protecting individual’s genetic information from misuse. This comment …

Preserving Film Preservation From The Right Of Publicity, Christopher J. Buccafusco, Jared Vasconcellos Grubow, Ian J. Postman

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

“And Yet It Moves”—The First Amendment And Certainty, Ronald K.L. Collins

Articles

Surprisingly few, if any, works on the First Amendment have explored the relation between free speech and certainty. The same holds true for decisional law. While this relationship is inherent in much free speech theory and doctrine, its treatment has nonetheless been rather opaque. In what follows, the author teases out— philosophically, textually, and operationally—the significance of that relationship and what it means for our First Amendment jurisprudence. In the process, he examines how the First Amendment operates to counter claims of certainty and likewise how it is employed to demand a degree of certainty from those who wish to …

Is The First Amendment Obsolete?, Tim Wu

Michigan Law Review

The First Amendment was brought to life in a period, the twentieth century, when the political speech environment was markedly different than today’s. With respect to any given issue, speech was scarce and limited to a few newspapers, pamphlets or magazines. The law was embedded, therefore, with the presumption that the greatest threat to free speech was direct punishment of speakers by government.

Today, in the internet and social media age, it is no longer speech that is scarce—rather, it is the attention of listeners. And those who seek to control speech use new methods that rely on the weaponization …

Filtering Fake News Through A Lens Of Supreme Court Observations And Adages, Clay Calvert, Austin Vining

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Essay analyzes multiple issues affecting fake news. It does so through a prism of seven observations by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the First Amendment, free speech, and other matters. The Court's wisdom in these quotations provides propitious points of entree for exploring how to address and remedy problems many fear fake news causes. The Essay concludes that because fake news will never be eradicated from the metaphorical marketplace of ideas, greater effort must be spent making real news - fake news's constructive flipside - more appetizing to the public.

Beyond Headlines & Holdings: Exploring Some Less Obvious Ramifications Of The Supreme Court's 2017 Free-Speech Rulings, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

Digging behind the holdings, this Article analyzes less conspicuous, yet highly consequential aspects of the United States Supreme Court’s First Amendment rulings during the opening half of 2017. The four facets of the opinions addressed here— items both within individual cases and cutting across them—hold vast significance for future free-speech battles. Nuances of the justices’ splintering in Matal v. Tam, Packingham v. North Carolina, and Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman are examined, as is the immediate impact of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Packingham dicta regarding online social networks. Furthermore, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s solo concurrence in the threats case of …

Reconsidering Incitement, Tinker And The Heckler’S Veto On College Campuses: Richard Spencer And The Charlottesville Factor, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Essay analyzes key First Amendment issues surrounding Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulos speaking on public university campuses. Some institutions (Ohio State University, Michigan State University and Pennsylvania State University) have flatly banned Spencer, citing fears of incitement to violence but also sparking federal lawsuits. Other schools have permitted Spencer to speak, but at massive security costs, in an attempt to prevent a so-called heckler’s veto. This Essay examines the tension between providing a public platform for controversial speakers and the costs associated with doing so, including the relevance of the Supreme Court’s aging incitement test created in Brandenburg v. …

Defamation Per Se And Transgender Status: When Macro-Level Value Judgments About Equality Trump Micro-Level Reputational Injury, Clay Calvert, Ashton T. Hampton, Austin Vining

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article uses the September 2017 defamation decision in Simmons v. American Media, Inc. as a springboard for examining defamatory meaning and reputational injury. Specifically, it focuses on cases in which judges acknowledge that plaintiffs have suffered reputational harm yet rule for defendants because promoting the cultural value of equality weighs against redress. In Simmons, a normative, axiological judgment--that the law should neither sanction nor ratify prejudicial views about transgender individuals-- prevailed at the trial court level over a celebrity's ability to recover for alleged reputational harm. Simmons sits at a dangerous intersection: a crossroads where a noble judicial desire …

First Amendment Envelope Pushers: Revisiting The Incitement-To-Violence Test With Messrs. Brandenburg, Trump, & Spencer, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article examines weaknesses with the United States Supreme Court’s Brandenburg v. Ohio incitement test as its fiftieth anniversary approaches. A lawsuit targeting Donald Trump, as well as multiple cases pitting white nationalist Richard Spencer against public universities, provide timely springboards for analysis. Specifically, In re Trump: 1) illustrates difficulties in proving Brandenburg’s intent requirement via circumstantial evidence; and 2) exposes problems regarding the extent to which past violent responses to a person’s words satisfy Brandenburg’s likelihood element. Additionally, the Spencer lawsuits raise concerns about: 1) whether Brandenburg should serve as a prior restraint mechanism for blocking potential speakers …

The Open Mic, Unplugged: Challenges To Viewpoint-Based Constraints On Public-Comment Periods, Frank D. Lomonte, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

Perhaps the purest form of citizen political expression is addressing a government body directly during the public-comment period. Despite its salutary civic benefits, the public-comment period faces escalating threats, with local elected officials imposing rigid controls on speakers. Disturbingly, these rules sometimes are enforced via arrest. The U.S. Supreme Court recently confronted this scenario in Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, involving the arrest of a citizen-critic who refused to stop using his city council's open-mic period to decry public corruption. While narrowly fact-specific, the Court's June 2018 resolution of the case reaffirms the importance of protecting speakers at …

Symposium: Truth, Trust And The First Amendment In The Digital Age: Foreword: Whither The Fourth Estate?, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky

UF Law Faculty Publications

As a professor of Media Law, I have devoted my career over the past quarter of a century to the idea that the press plays a special role in our democracy. That role is largely encapsulated by the concept of the press as Fourth Estate – an unofficial branch of government in our scheme of separation of powers that checks the power of the three official branches. In our constitutional scheme, the press is the watchdog that informs us what the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government are up to and continually replenishes the stock of news – real …

Extremist Speech, Compelled Conformity, And Censorship Creep, Danielle K. Citron

Faculty Scholarship

Silicon Valley has long been viewed as a full-throated champion of First Amendment values. The dominant online platforms, however, have recently adopted speech policies and processes that depart from the U.S. model. In an agreement with the European Commission, tech companies have pledged to respond to reports of hate speech within twenty-four hours, a hasty process that may trade valuable expression for speedy results. Plans have been announced for an industry database that will allow the same companies to share hashed images of banned extremist content for review and removal elsewhere.

These changes are less the result of voluntary market …

Four Principles For Digital Expression (You Won't Believe #3!), Danielle K. Citron, Neil Richards

Faculty Scholarship

At the dawn of the Internet’s emergence, the Supreme Court rhapsodized about its potential as a tool for free expression and political liberation. In ACLU v. Reno (1997), the Supreme Court adopted a bold vision of Internet expression to strike down a federal law - the Communications Decency Act - that restricted digital expression to forms that were merely “decent.” Far more than the printing press, the Court explained, the mid-90s Internet enabled anyone to become a town crier. Communication no longer required the permission of powerful entities. With a network connection, the powerless had as much luck reaching a …

When Judges Are Theologians: Adjudicating Religious Questions, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

Implied Consent To Religious Institutions: A Primer And A Defense, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand