Law Commons^™

The Economics Of Information And The Meaning Of Speech, Charles W. Collier

Catholic University Law Review

In common usage the communication of information is not sharply distinguished from the use of language or speech to make factual or propositional statements. So it should come as no surprise that one of the main legal justifications for protecting speech--that it underwrites a “marketplace of ideas” and thereby contributes to the search for truth--has strong parallels in the economic theory of information. “Indeed,” as Kenneth Arrow writes, “the market system as a whole has frequently been considered as an organization for the allocation of resources; the typical argument for its superiority to authoritative central allocation has been the greater …

Freedom Of Thought In The United States: The First Amendment, Marketplaces Of Ideas, And The Internet, John G. Francis, Leslie Francis

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Freedom of thought is not directly protected as a right in the United States. Instead, US First Amendment law protects a range of rights that may allow thoughts to be expressed. Freedom of speech has been granted especially robust protection. US courts have extended this protection to a wide range of commercial activities judged to have expressive content. In protecting these rights, US jurisprudence frequently relies on the image of the marketplace of ideas as furthering the search for truth. This commercial image, however, has increasingly detached expressive rights from the understanding of freedom of thought as a critical forum …

Freedom Of The Press In Post-Truthism America, Ronnell Anderson Jones, Lisa Grow Sun

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Freedom of the press in America is at a critical crossroads in a number of ways, but one stands out as most fundamental: the stark impact of the current debate over “Post-Truthism.” Press freedom jurisprudence has long been structured around the concept of an audience member’s search for truth in a marketplace of ideas. But social science research increasingly suggests that individual information consumers are in fact often driven by emotion, affirmation of political identity, and the need for cognitive shortcuts, and that they may not possess the truth-seeking, rational processing, or information-updating capabilities that the Court assumes. Whether this …

Fake News And The First Amendment: Reconciling A Disconnect Between Theory And Doctrine, Clay Calvert, Stephanie Mcneff, Austin Vining, Sebastian Zarate

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article analyzes calls for regulating so-called “fake news” through the lens of both traditional theories of free expression – namely, the marketplace of ideas and democratic self-governance – and two well-established First Amendment doctrines, strict scrutiny and underinclusivity. The Article argues there is, at first glance, a seeming disconnect between theory and doctrine when it comes to either censoring or safeguarding fake news. The Article contends, however, that a structural rights interpretation of the First Amendment offers a viable means of reconciling theory and doctrine. A structural rights approach focuses on the dangers of collective power in defining the …

The Resilience Of Noxious Doctrine: The 2016 Election, The Marketplace Of Ideas, And The Obstinacy Of Bias, Leonard M. Niehoff, Deeva Shah

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

The Supreme Court has recognized the central role that free expression plays in our democratic enterprise. In his dissenting opinion in United States v. Abrams, Justice Holmes offered a theory of how free expression advances our search for truth and our cultivation of an informed electorate. That model—often called the “marketplace of ideas,” based upon the metaphor used by Holmes—has proven to be one of the most persistent and influential concepts in First Amendment jurisprudence.

The marketplace of ideas model essentially holds that free expression serves our democratic goals by allowing differing proposed truths and versions of the facts …

Multifactoral Free Speech, Alexander Tsesis

Northwestern University Law Review

This Article presents a multifactoral approach to free speech analysis. Difficult cases present a variety of challenges that require judges to weigh concerns for the protection of robust dialogue, especially about public issues, against concerns that sound in common law (such as reputation), statutory law (such as repose against harassment), and in constitutional law (such as copyright). Even when speech is implicated, the Court should aim to resolve other relevant individual and social issues arising from litigation. Focusing only on free speech categories is likely to discount substantial, and sometimes compelling, social concerns warranting reflection, analysis, and application. Examining the …

Injury-In-Fact In Chilling Effect Challenges To Public University Speech Codes, Jennifer L. Bruneau

Catholic University Law Review

Campus speech codes began to spring up on university campuses during the 1980s and continue to operate today. The codes regulate various forms of arguably offensive speech, including speech regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, ideology, views, and political affiliation. Numerous litigants have challenged the chilling effect these policies have on student and faculty speech, but in cases where the challenged code has not yet been enforced, some courts find that the plaintiff has not met the “injury-in-fact” requirement for Article III standing. The Supreme Court has not ruled on standing requirements in speech code challenges and lower courts are divided. …

Speaker Discrimination: The Next Frontier Of Free Speech, Michael Kagan

Florida State University Law Review

Citizens United v. FEC articulated a pillar of free speech doctrine that is independent from the well-known controversies about corporate personhood and the role of money in elections. For the first time, the Supreme Court clearly said that discrimination on the basis of the identity of the speaker offends the First Amendment. Previously, the focus of free speech doctrine had been on the content and forum of speech, not on the identity of the speaker. It is possible that protection from speaker identity discrimination had long been implicit in free speech case law, but has now been given more full-throated …

The Worst Test Of Truth: The "Marketplace Of Ideas" As Faulty Metaphor, Thomas W. Joo

Thomas W Joo

In his famous dissent in Abrams v. United States, Justice Holmes proclaimed that “the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” This Article critiques the basic argument against speech regulation that has developed from the “marketplace of ideas” metaphor: that speech should be “free” because markets are “free,” and because free markets produce “truth.” These assertions about markets are taken for granted, but they portray markets and market regulation inaccurately; thus economic markets provide a poor analogy for the deregulation of speech.

First Amendment jurisprudence invokes the …

To Drink The Cup Of Fury: Funeral Picketing, Public Discourse And The First Amendment, Steven J. Heyman

All Faculty Scholarship

In Snyder v. Phelps, the Supreme Court held that the Westboro Baptist Church had a First Amendment right to picket the funeral of a young soldier killed in Iraq. This decision reinforces a position that has become increasingly prevalent in First Amendment jurisprudence – the view that the state may not regulate public discourse to protect individuals from emotional or dignitary injury. In this Article, I argue that this view is deeply problematic for two reasons: it unduly sacrifices the value of individual personality and it tends to undermine the sphere of public discourse itself by negating the practical and …

Regulating From Typewriters In An Internet Age: The Development & Regulation Of Mass Media Usage In Presidential Campaigns, Anthony J. King

Anthony J. King

The American election process has become a misleading process of campaign promises and self-promotion, thus diluting its primary and most fundamental purpose. This discrepancy can be traced to three primary groups; (1) the candidates, who supplied the motive; (2) the mass media, who supplied the means; and (3) the electorate, who so far have allowed it to happen. Seeking to remedy the situation lawmakers have turned to regulations of the media in attempt to assure fairness and nurture the marketplace of ideas. These numerous attempts at fairness have been met with a mixed reception and mixed results leading to questions …

Nobody's Fools: The Rational Audience As First Amendment Ideal, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

Assumptions about audiences shape the outcomes of First Amendment cases. Yet the Supreme Court rarely specifies what its assumptions about audiences are, much less attempts to justify them. Drawing on literary theory, this Article identifies and defends two critical assumptions that emerge from First Amendment cases involving so-called "core" speech. The first is that audiences are capable of rationally assessing the truth, quality, and credibility of core speech. The second is that more speech is generally preferable to less. These assumptions, which I refer to collectively as the rational audience model, lie at the heart of the "marketplace of ideas" …

Thoughts On Commercial Speech: A Roundtable Discussion, Ronald K.L. Collins, Steven H. Shiffrin, Erwin Chemerinsky, Kathleen M. Sullivan

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Adam Liptak, the legal affairs writer for The New York Times, moderates a lively discussion about commercial speech between three esteemed constitutional scholars: Professor Erwin Chemerinsky of Duke University School of Law; Professor Kathleen Sullivan of Stanford Law School; and Professor Steve Shiffrin of Cornell Law School. These scholars debate the proper definition of defining commercial speech, how the corporate identity of a speaker and the content of the speech determines the level of First Amendment protection, whether it is possible to demarcate commercial speech from political speech, and the problems of paternalism and viewpoint discrimination in this complex and …

Reading Holmes Through The Lens Of Schauer: The Abrams Dissent, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

Even the best scholars rarely persuade. Mostly, they illuminate. They make us more discerning readers and interlocutors.

Here I want to illustrate how Frederick Schauer's work on the law of free speech can help us to read what may be the single most influential judicial opinion ever written on that subject, Justice Holmes's famous dissent in Abrams v. United States. So far as I am aware, Schauer has not produced anything like a line-by-line parsing of the Holmes opinion. I claim nevertheless that a reader familiar with Schauer's ideas is far better prepared on that account to understand what Holmes …

Silence And The Word, Paul Campos

Publications

No abstract provided.

Cable Traffic And The First Amendment Must-Carry Under A Diversity Approach And Antitrust As Possible Alternative, Bruno Vandermeulen

LLM Theses and Essays

Recent technological progress in the field of telecommunications has greatly changed the competitive structure between broadcasters, cable operators, and telephone companies. The legal and economic environment for these media participants has shifted, and new problems have arisen. One major problem is the enhanced threat of concentration of media corporations, as corporate bigness becomes desirable and the number of diversified owners of media outlets continues to decrease. This paper analyzes broadcasting regulations and subsequent case law to show the concern by the legislature and regulatory agencies to preserve diversity in opinion and media-ownership through emphasis on “localism” and a “marketplace of …

Aliens In The Marketplace Of Ideas: The Government, The Academy, And The Mccarran-Walter Act, John A. Scanlan

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.