Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- First Amendment (16)
- Freedom of speech (14)
- Freedom of the Press (7)
- Eleventh Circuit (4)
- Social media (4)
-
- Supreme Court (4)
- Censorship (3)
- Free speech (3)
- Freedom of the press (3)
- COVID-19 (2)
- Due Process (2)
- Establishment clause (Constitutional law) (2)
- Hate speech (2)
- Nonconsensual pornography (2)
- Revenge porn (2)
- Student speech (2)
- AI Realism (1)
- Accused's rights (1)
- Actual Malice Privilege (1)
- Admiralty Jurisdiction (1)
- And Bisexual Group of Boston (1)
- Anti-normalization (1)
- Antisemitic (1)
- Antisemitism (1)
- Biden v. Knight First Amend. Inst. at Colum. Univ (1)
- Bitcoin (1)
- Campus discourse (1)
- Campus speech codes (1)
- Certiorari (1)
- Circuit split (1)
Articles 31 - 52 of 52
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of Supervision, Centerfolds, And Censorship: Sexual Harassment, The First Amendment, And The Contours Of Title Vii, Amy Horton
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Corporate Legal Theory Under The First Amendment: Bellotti And Austin, Charles D. Watts Jr.
Corporate Legal Theory Under The First Amendment: Bellotti And Austin, Charles D. Watts Jr.
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Great 1989-1990 Flag Flap: An Historical, Political, And Legal Analysis, Robert Justin Goldstein
The Great 1989-1990 Flag Flap: An Historical, Political, And Legal Analysis, Robert Justin Goldstein
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Subliminal Perception And The First Amendment: Yelling Fire In A Crowded Mind?, Scot Silverglate
Subliminal Perception And The First Amendment: Yelling Fire In A Crowded Mind?, Scot Silverglate
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Flag Burning Yes, Loud Music No: What's The Catch?, Alicia Otazo Sorondo
Flag Burning Yes, Loud Music No: What's The Catch?, Alicia Otazo Sorondo
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Right To Refuse Mental Health Treatment: A First Amendment Perspective, Bruce J. Winick
The Right To Refuse Mental Health Treatment: A First Amendment Perspective, Bruce J. Winick
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Indirect Gag Orders And The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint, Sheryl A. Bjork
Indirect Gag Orders And The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint, Sheryl A. Bjork
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Rico's Forfeiture Provision: A First Amendment Restraint On Adult Bookstores, Ana Maria Marin
Rico's Forfeiture Provision: A First Amendment Restraint On Adult Bookstores, Ana Maria Marin
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Incidental Regulation Of Free Speech, David S. Day
The Incidental Regulation Of Free Speech, David S. Day
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The "Political Propaganda" Label Under Fara: Abridgement Of Free Speech Or Legitimate Regulation?, Farrokh Jhabvala
The "Political Propaganda" Label Under Fara: Abridgement Of Free Speech Or Legitimate Regulation?, Farrokh Jhabvala
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
And Now For A Moment Of Silence: Wallace V. Jaffree, Sylvia Sohn Penneys
And Now For A Moment Of Silence: Wallace V. Jaffree, Sylvia Sohn Penneys
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Clark V. Community For Creative Non-Violence: First Amendment Safeguards-Their Sum Is Less Than Their Parts, James B. Putney
Clark V. Community For Creative Non-Violence: First Amendment Safeguards-Their Sum Is Less Than Their Parts, James B. Putney
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Fcc V. League Of Women Voters: Freedom Of Public Broadcasters To Editorialize, Kathy Gregolet
Fcc V. League Of Women Voters: Freedom Of Public Broadcasters To Editorialize, Kathy Gregolet
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Death Of A Princess Cases: Television Programming By State-Owned Public Broadcasters And Viewers' First Amendment Rights, Jonathan Goodman
The Death Of A Princess Cases: Television Programming By State-Owned Public Broadcasters And Viewers' First Amendment Rights, Jonathan Goodman
University of Miami Law Review
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit consolidated and reheard en banc two cases in which stateowned public television stations cancelled scheduled broadcasts because of the program's content. After examining the first amendment issues that arise when the government exercises editorial discretion in selecting programs, the author concludes that the Fifth Circuit's opinion does not sufficiently protect viewers' interests.
In Search Of Premises, Irving Younger
In Search Of Premises, Irving Younger
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Right To Scrutinize Government: Toward A First Amendment Theory Of Accountability, Anthony Lewis
The Right To Scrutinize Government: Toward A First Amendment Theory Of Accountability, Anthony Lewis
University of Miami Law Review
The speaker eschews the view that the press enjoys a "preferred position" under the first amendment and aligns his beliefs with the view of Alexander Meiklejohn-an informed public is necessary for the success of a self-governing democracy. Mr. Lewis analyzes case law and concludes that the Court should cautiously "develop the principle of public accountability as a fundamental premise of the first amendment," guaranteeing a limited right of acquiring information to scrutinize government.
The First Amendment And The Press, Irwin P. Stotzky
The First Amendment And The Press, Irwin P. Stotzky
University of Miami Law Review
No abstract provided.
Press Rights And Government Power To Structure The Press, C. Edwin Baker
Press Rights And Government Power To Structure The Press, C. Edwin Baker
University of Miami Law Review
First, Professor Baker explores an instrumentalist argument for special press rights going beyond those protected by a liberty theory of freedom of speech. Then, in Part II, he examines the threats of -government power and private economic power to freedom of the "press" and considers the permissible extent of government intervention to structure the press or to protect it from private threats.
Commentary: The Limited Utility Of The First Amendment As A Means Of Securing Access By The Press And The Public To Proceedings In Criminal Cases, Edward L. Barrett Jr.
Commentary: The Limited Utility Of The First Amendment As A Means Of Securing Access By The Press And The Public To Proceedings In Criminal Cases, Edward L. Barrett Jr.
University of Miami Law Review
The author examines the models proposed in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale to provide constitutional protection of a public interest in access to judicial proceedings without impairing the interest of the defendant in a fair trial. Whether based on the first amendment or the sixth amendment, a constitutional approach requiring an immediate and delicate balancing of those interests by the trial court would be, in the author's view, unsatisfactory and unworkable. In the alternative, he suggests that legislative rather than judicial balancing may provide a more practical solution.
Note: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia: A Demarcation Of Access, Dennis Scholl
Note: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia: A Demarcation Of Access, Dennis Scholl
University of Miami Law Review
Several months after this symposium, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, holding that the Constitution implicitly guarantees the right of the public to attend a criminal trial, which a court must keep open to the public, absent an express finding of an overriding interest. This note explores the numerous opinions in Richmond Newspapers to determine whether that case has expanded access rights since the recent decision in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale. The author reconciles the two decisions and concludes that the issues raised in the symposium remain vital.
First Amendment Interest Balancing-Behind Bars?, Teresa L. Mussetto
First Amendment Interest Balancing-Behind Bars?, Teresa L. Mussetto
University of Miami Law Review
This casenote examines the recent decision of Houchins v. KQED; Inc., in which the Supreme Court of the United States narrowly construed the right of access afforded the news media in their coverage of penal facilities. The analysis focuses upon the first amendment methodology utilized by the Court in its decisionmaking process. The author concludes with a critical assessment of the Court's departure from accurate interest balancing technique.