Law Commons^™

Can There Really Be "Free Speech" In Public Schools?, Richard W. Garnett

Richard W Garnett

The Supreme Court's decision in Morse v. Frederick leaves unresolved many interesting and difficult problems about the authority of public-school officials to regulate public-school students' speech. Perhaps the most intriguing question posed by the litigation, decision, and opinions in More is one that the various Justices who wrote in the case never squarely addressed: What is the "basic education mission" of public schools, and what are the implications of this "mission" for officials' authority and students' free-speech rights. Given what we have come to think the Free Speech clause means, and considering the values it is thought to enshrine and …

Lost In The Compromise: Free Speech, Criminal Justice, And Attorney Pretrial Publicity, Margaret Tarkington

Margaret C Tarkington

Publicity by the prosecution and defense in the criminal proceedings against George Zimmerman again raised the question of the appropriate scope of First Amendment protection for attorney pretrial publicity. The Supreme Court, the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, and many scholars have viewed restrictions on attorney pretrial publicity as a compromise between the constitutional guarantees of free speech and a fair trial. Nevertheless, scholars advocate widely divergent levels of free speech protection for attorney pretrial publicity—ranging from core free speech protection to extremely limited protection. Traditional First Amendment doctrines fail to elucidate the proper scope of free speech rights for …

The First Amendment Structure For Speakers And Speech, Charles W. Rhodes

Charles W Rhodes

A noticeable trend in the Roberts Court’s free speech decisions is heightened attention to the dimensions of the First Amendment. From holding false factual statements, violent video games, and depictions of animal cruelty are covered by the First Amendment, to determining that a legislator’s vote, governmental acceptance of a monument, and a law school’s refusal to allow access to military recruiters are not, the Court has highlighted the importance of evaluating both the scope of the First Amendment and the appropriate attribution of communicative efforts. But the Court has failed to announce an overarching structural framework for resolving these prefatory …

Visual Gut Punch: Persuasion, Emotion, And The Constitutional Meaning Of Graphic Disclosure, Ellen P. Goodman

ellen p. goodman

The ability of government to “nudge” with information mandates, or merely to inform consumers of risks, is circumscribed by First Amendment interests that have been poorly articulated in the relevant law and commentary. New graphic cigarette warning labels supplied courts with the first opportunity to assess the informational interests attending novel forms of product disclosures. The D.C. Circuit enjoined them as unconstitutional, compelled by a narrative that the graphic labels converted government from objective informer to ideological persuader, shouting its warning to manipulate consumer decisions. This interpretation will leave little room for graphic disclosure and is already being used to …

Limited Powers In The Looking-Glass: Otiose Textualism, And An Empirical Analysis Of Other Approaches, When Activitists In Private Shopping Centers Claim State Constitutional Liberties, Richard Peltz-Steele

Richard J. Peltz-Steele

This article examines closely a narrow range of highly factually analogous cases, in which state constitutional rights are asserted despite a clear lack of entitlement to assert any federal constitutional claim. Specifically, the cases selected are those in which private persons assert a right to conduct expressive activity, including electoral activity, in private shopping centers during hours when the properties are held open to the general public. These cases may be referred to colloquially as “the mall cases.” Selected here are only those which were decided after the federal question became clear. The Article first inquires into the role of …

Use "The Filter You Were Born With": The Unconstitutionality Of Mandatory Internet Filtering For The Adult Patrons Of Public Libraries, Richard J. Peltz-Steele

Richard J. Peltz-Steele

The only federal court (at the time of this writing) to consider the question ruled unconstitutional the mandatory filtering of Internet access for the adult patrons of public libraries. That 1998 decision helped the American Library Association and other free speech advocates fend off mandatory filtering for two years at the state and federal level, against the vigorous efforts of filtering proponents. Then, in 2000, the U.S. Congress conditioned federal funding of libraries on filter use, forcing the question into the courts as the latest colossal struggle over Internet regulation. This Article contends that the federal court in 1998 was …

Censorship Tsunami Spares College Media: To Protect Free Expression On Public Campuses, Lessons From The "College Hazelwood" Case, Richard J. Peltz-Steele

Richard J. Peltz-Steele

Since the advent of journalism schools in the college academy, student publications have taken their place as a vital component of campus life. As counterparts to the Fourth Estate in the society at large, college journalists act as watchdogs on student government, ensuring that student money is wisely spent and student justice equitably administered. As an outpost of the Fourth Estate, college journalism serves all the public by monitoring the administration of higher education. In September 1999, a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit threatened to radically distort the face of college journalism by rendering …

Sex Is Less Offensive Than Violence: A Call To Update Obscenity Jurisprudence, Rachel Simon

Rachel Simon

This article addresses the gender bias presented by the disparate treatment of sex and violence under current obscenity jurisprudence. Under the controlling standard set forth by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, sexual works may readily be regulated as obscenity, while violent works unequivocally may not. This article posits that this disparate treatment is the product of entrenched stereotypes about the way men and women “should” react to sex and violence, and notes the hypocrisy of failing to apply the same reasoning to assessments of violent versus sexual material.

First, reliance on “community standards” to define what material …