Law Commons^™

Locked Up, Shut Up: Why Speech In Prison Matters, Evan Bianchi, David Shapiro

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article proceeds in three Parts. Part I describes the deferential Turner standard that governs First Amendment claims brought by prisoners. Virtually every word uttered or written to a prisoner and virtually every word uttered or written by a prisoner receives extremely limited legal protection. Largely as a result of this legal regime, senseless censorship is all too common in American prisons. Jailers and prison officials seem to have received the message that they can ban speech with impunity.

Part II argues that the combination of Turner deference and mass incarceration divests prisoners of expressive power, thereby distorting public …

The New Governors: The People, Rules And Processes Governing Online Speech, Kate Klonick

Faculty Publications

Private online platforms have an increasingly essential role in free speech and participation in democratic culture. But while it might appear that any internet user can publish freely and instantly online, many platforms actively curate the content posted by their users. How and why these platforms operate to moderate speech is largely opaque.

This Article provides the first analysis of what these platforms are actually doing to moderate online speech under a regulatory and First Amendment framework. Drawing from original interviews, archived materials, and internal documents, this Article describes how three major online platforms — Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube — …

Can You Understand This Message? An Examination Of Hurley V. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Group Of Boston's Impact On Spence V. Washington, Sandy Tomasik

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note analyzes the effect that Hurley had on the Spence factors and suggests that the particularized requirement has been lowered. This is the best approach to encouraging speech while balancing other important interests. Part I discusses the development of the freedom of speech, from protecting the spoken and written word to protecting expressive conduct. Part II outlines the different approaches taken by the circuit courts in deciding whether conduct is protected as speech and, in particular, what effect Hurley had on Spence. Part III critically analyzes each of these approaches and concludes that the Eleventh Circuit’s approach …