Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Between The Devil And The Deep Blue Sea: Crime Victims' Dilemma After Simon & Schuster, Inc. V. Members Of The New York Crime Victims Board, 112 S. Ct. 501 (1991), Michele C. Meske
Between The Devil And The Deep Blue Sea: Crime Victims' Dilemma After Simon & Schuster, Inc. V. Members Of The New York Crime Victims Board, 112 S. Ct. 501 (1991), Michele C. Meske
Washington Law Review
In Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York Crime Victims Board, the Supreme Court held that a statute, New York's "Son of Sam" law, that allowed crime victims to reach the proceeds of their victimizers' media reenactments of the criminals' wrongful acts violated the First Amendment. By invalidating the statute, the Supreme Court eliminated the only presently available means to prevent criminals from profiting from their crimes and exploiting their victims. This Comment examines the origins of this problem and proposes that courts use restitutions common law doctrines to prevent criminals who sell their stories from profiting …
Regulating Cable Television Rates: A Phantom First Amendment Problem, Matthew Jolly
Regulating Cable Television Rates: A Phantom First Amendment Problem, Matthew Jolly
Washington Law Review
Public concern over cable television's status as a monopoly has generated a movement to allow local franchising authorities to regulate cable service rates. Because the courts have yet to hear a First Amendment challenge to imposing rate regulation on a member of the media, the constitutionality of cable rate regulation is not settled. This Comment argues that the restriction on speech resulting from rate regulation is outweighed by the substantial government interest in preventing unfair monopoly pricing practices.
Modern Media And The First Amendment: Rediscovering Freedom Of The Press, Donald E. Lively
Modern Media And The First Amendment: Rediscovering Freedom Of The Press, Donald E. Lively
Washington Law Review
Freedom of the press, like other constitutional guarantees is not an absolute. Nor does it have the same meaning for all media. For more than a century after the constitution was framed and ratified, the press was coextensive with publishing. Over the course of the twentieth century, electronic media have emerged and extended the contours of the press. At the same time, however, liberty of the press has developed in idiosyncratic terms that have fostered a First Amendment hierarchy. While print media continue to be afforded maximum constitutional security, newer communications methodologies have been more susceptible to official management and …
Confidentially Speaking: Protecting The Press From Liability For Broken Confidentiality Promises—Cohen V. Cowles Media Co., 111 S. Ct. 2513 (1991), Jeffrey A. Richards
Confidentially Speaking: Protecting The Press From Liability For Broken Confidentiality Promises—Cohen V. Cowles Media Co., 111 S. Ct. 2513 (1991), Jeffrey A. Richards
Washington Law Review
In Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment does not bar suits against newspapers for breaches of confidentiality promises. By following its cases holding that the press is subject to neutral laws, the Court ignored its precedent mandating that state laws inhibiting publication violate the First Amendment absent a compelling state interest. This Note explores both lines of cases and concludes that application of a state law that inhibits publication is unconstitutional if its utility in effecting a legitimate state interest is outweighed by the public's interest in receiving the information. Therefore, courts should …