Law Commons^™

Signed, Your Coach: Restricting Speech In Athletic Recruiting In Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n V. Brentwood Academy, Brian Craddock

Mercer Law Review

In Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n v. Brentwood Academy ("Brentwood I/,), the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that an athletic association may enforce its anti-undue-influence recruiting policy, restricting the speech of its voluntary member schools, to avoid undue influence on young student athletes during the recruitment process. In reaching its holding, the Court extended two lines of First Amendment jurisprudence. First, the Court extended the application of Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Ass'n to a context other than attorney-client solicitation for the first time. In doing so, the Court held that the possibility of undue influence in athletic recruiting …

Constitutional Law—First Amendment & Freedom Of Speech—Students May Be Regarded As Closed-Circuit Recipients Of The State's Anti Drug Message: The Supreme Court Creates A New Exception To The Tinker Student Speech Standard. Morse V. Frederick, 127 S. Ct. 2618 (2007), Megan D. Hargraves

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

This note argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Morse significantly weakens students' free speech rights. Although the Court stated that students "do not shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates," its decisions, in effect, weakens Tinker's important holding that students are entitled to First Amendment protection. The note asserts that the Court's opinion broadens schools' authority to regulate student speech in ways that are contrary to fundamental First Amendment values and explicitly allows schools to engage in highly suspect viewpoint discrimination.

The note first examines some of the fundamental First Amendment values at stake in student speech …

The Cross At College: Accomodation And Acknowledgment Of Religion At Public Universities, Ira C. Lupu, Robert W. Tuttle

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Falsity, Insincerity, And The Freedom Of Expression, Mark Spottswood

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Three decades ago, the Supreme Court announced that false statements of fact are devoid of constitutional value, without providing either a reasoned explanation for that principle or any supporting citations. This assertion has become one of the most frequently repeated dogmas of First Amendment law and theory, endlessly repeated and never challenged. Disturbingly, this idea has provided the theoretic foundation for a regime in which some speakers can be penalized for even honestly believed factual errors. Even worse, this dogma is flat wrong.

False statements often have value in themselves, and we should protect them even in some situations where …

Toward A Rfra That Works, Nicholas Nugent

Vanderbilt Law Review

The history of the Supreme Court's First Amendment jurisprudence regarding the proper standard of protection for the free exercise of religion is complicated. In determining how the First Amendment speaks to situations in which generally applicable health, welfare, and safety laws incidentally or accidentally burden certain individuals' religious practices, the Court has vacillated between different standards and different extremes, overruling itself several times. Early on, the Court held that, provided the government did not interfere deliberately with religion for religious reasons, an inadvertent interference with religious practice raised no Free xercise Clause problem,' "no matter how trivial the state's nonreligious …

Higher Education, Harassment, And First Amendment Opportunism, Kenneth L. Marcus

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Free Expression And Education: Between Two Democracies, Stephen M. Feldman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Intelligent Design In Public University Science Departments: Academic Freedom Or Establishment Of Religion, Frank S. Ravitch

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Free Speech And The Case For Constitutional Exceptionalism, Roger P. Alford

Michigan Law Review

Embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the evocative proposition that "[e]veryone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression." Beneath that abstraction there is anything but universal agreement. Modern democratic societies disagree on the text, content, theory, and practice of this liberty. They disagree on whether it is a privileged right or a subordinate value. They disagree on what constitutes speech and what speech is worthy of protection. They disagree on theoretical foundations, uncertain if the right is grounded in libertarian impulses, the promotion of a marketplace of ideas, or the advancement of participatory democracy. They …

Anti-Harassment Provisions Revisited: No Bright-Line Rule, Martha Mccarthy

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Pledge Of Allegiance In The Classroom And The Court: An Epic Struggle Over The Meaning Of The Establishment Clause Of The First Amendment, Brian Wheeler

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Student Speech: School Boards, Gay/Straight Alliances, And The Equal Access Act, Todd A. Demitchell, Richard Fossey

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Court's Missed Opportunity In Harper V. Poway, Andrew Canter, Gabriel Pardo

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Contents, First Amendment Law Review

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Speech And Subsidies: How Government Uses Financial Threats And Incentives To Dampen First Amendment Protections, Crandall Close

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court As Civic Educator: Free Speech According To Justice Kennedy, Helen J. Knowles

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Speech, World War I, And Republican Democracy: The Internal And External Holmes, Stephen M. Feldman

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

So Easily Offended - A First Amendment Analysis Of The Fcc's Evolving Regulation Of Broadcast Indecency And Standards For Our Contemporary Community, Paige Connor Worsham

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lost Without Translation: The Official English Movement And The First Amendment, Amy Mackin

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Purging Religion From Prisons: The Constitutionality Of The Standardized Chapel Library Project, Andrew Lincoln

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Two-Step Evidentiary And Causation Quandary For Medium- Specific Laws Targeting Sexual And Violent Content: First Proving Harm And Injury To Silence Speech, Then Proving Redress And Rehabilitation Through Censorship, Clay Calvert

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article argues that legislators today that want to suppress First Amendment-protected images of sexual and violent conduct conveyed on a specific medium face a steep two-step evidentiary burden. First, they must prove actual harm caused by the speech in question as it is conveyed on a specific medium--not the aggregate injury from viewing all media generallythat is sufficient to overcome free-speech rights. Second, even if sufficient harm from viewing violent or sexual content on a particular medium is proven by social science research, the government then must prove that its legislative remedy-its censorship of the harmful expression conveyed via …

The Colonel's Finest Campaign: Robert R. Mccormick And Near V. Minnesota, Eric B. Easton

Federal Communications Law Journal

Media corporations and their professional and trade associations, as well as organizations such as Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the American Civil Liberties Union, regularly monitor litigation that implicates First Amendment values and decide whether, when, and how to intervene. But that was not always the case. While media companies have always lobbied and litigated in support of their business interests-antitrust, copyright, postal rates, taxes-litigation by the institutional press to create or avoid doctrinal precedent under the First Amendment began only in the late 1920s. Once the United States Supreme Court recognized the incorporation of the First …

Reassessing Turner And Litigating The Must-Carry Law Beyond A Facial Challenge, R. Matthew Warner

Federal Communications Law Journal

In recent decades, the must-carry rules have had a troubled constitutional history. After two sets of rules were struck down by the D.C. Circuit for violating the First Amendment rights of both cable programmers and operators, Congress revised the must-carry rules in the 1992 Cable Act. In 1997, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, determined that the congressional must-carry law was facially constitutional. However, does the Turner II decision preclude further First Amendment challenges to the must-carry law? This Note argues that the answer is no and that the time is drawing near for new challenges.

Ball On A Needle: Hein V. Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. And The Future Of Establishment Clause Adjudication, Ira C. Lupu, Robert W. Tuttle

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Association, The Communist Party, And The Hollywood Ten: The Forgotten First Amendment Legacy Of Charles Hamilton Houston, Jose Felipe Anderson

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bailing Out The Print Newspaper Industry: A Not-So-Joking Public Policy And First Amendment Analysis, Clay Calvert

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Battle Of The Lists: The Use Of Approved Versus Restricted Religious Book Lists In Prisons, Joanna E. Varner

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Political Marketplace Metaphor From A Labor Perspective, The, Thomas Tso

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mt. Soledad In The Supreme Court's Crosshairs: Why Legislative Recognition Should Be Considered In Public Displays Of Religion, Adrian R. Conteras

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Where Are Your Papers? Photo Identification As A Prerequisite To Voting, Michael J. Kasper

Florida A & M University Law Review

Remember the old war movies? Richard Attenborough or William Holden is slowly walking down misty Parisian streets, the collar of his trench turned up, the brim of the fedora pulled low. A black sedan screeches around the corner and screams to a stop in front of him before he has time to react. Soldiers bound from the car, pistols drawn, and bark "Vhere are your papers?" When did America become this movie? The U.S. Supreme Court will take up this question this term. This article explores five recent state laws, from Indiana, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Missouri requiring citizens to …