Law Commons^™

Freedom Of Thought, Offensive Fantasies And The Fundamental Human Right To Hold Deviant Ideas: Why The Seventh Circuit Got It Wrong In Doe V. City Of Lafayette, Indiana, Clay Calvert

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “A precarious balance and considerable tension exists between two competing legal interests – the essential, First Amendment-grounded human right to freedom of thought, on the one hand, and the desire to prevent harm and injury that might occur if thought is converted to action, on the other. To understand this tension, it is useful to start by considering three different and disturbing factual scenarios.

This article examines and critiques the majority opinion of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in City of Lafayette. The majority held that the city’s ban of John Doe, a convicted sex offender, from its …

Some Dumb Girl Syndrome: Challenging And Subverting Destructive Stereotypes Of Female Attorneys, Ann Bartow

Law Faculty Scholarship

This Essay considers ways in which female attorneys confront sexism and stereotyping in the legal profession and in life, and strongly endorses embracing feminism, and wearing comfortable shoes.