Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Of Flags And Menorahs: The Power Of Individual And Governmental Symbolic Speech, Mark F. Kohler
Of Flags And Menorahs: The Power Of Individual And Governmental Symbolic Speech, Mark F. Kohler
Akron Law Review
The aim of this article will be to explore the nature of symbolic speech, both individual and governmental. Using Johnson and Allegheny County as a backdrop, four themes will emerge from the article. First, both individuals and government speak and speak powerfully through symbols and symbolic conduct. Second, medium-based regulation of individual speech should receive careful judicial scrutiny. Third, unlike individual symbolic expression, governmental symbolic speech is subject to substantial content-based restrictions. Finally, careful distinctions must be drawn between government-initiated symbolic speech and governmental endorsement of individual symbolic speech.
Newdow Calls For A New Day In Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides The Necessary Renovation, James A. Campbell
Newdow Calls For A New Day In Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides The Necessary Renovation, James A. Campbell
Akron Law Review
This Comment examines the concurring opinions of Justice O’Connor and Justice Thomas in Newdow and explores whether either approach is able to solve the problems inherent in the Court’s current analysis. Section II discusses the meaning of the Establishment Clause and explores its historical background. Section III outlines current Establishment Clause analysis and its inherent hostility toward religion. Section IV introduces O’Connor’s ceremonial deism approach and Thomas’s “actual legal coercion” test, as outlined in Newdow. Section V discusses the inability of O’Connor’s approach to solve the inherent deficiencies in the Court’s current analysis, whereas, Section VI argues that Thomas’s actual …
Revival: Toward A Formal Neutrality Approach To Economic Development Transfers To Religious Institutions, Ryan A. Doringo
Revival: Toward A Formal Neutrality Approach To Economic Development Transfers To Religious Institutions, Ryan A. Doringo
Akron Law Review
Part I of this Note explores the contours of the complicated history of the Establishment Clause by examining the creation of the Lemon test and the inconsistencies of the test’s subsequent application. The Note then explores Justice O’Connor’s endorsement modification to that test. Part I concludes with a discussion of the Supreme Court’s move toward embracing a principle formal neutrality. Part II provides a factual history of the transfer at issue and a detailed summary of the District Court’s opinion in Wirtz. Part III of the Note explains that the Constitution does not preclude economic development transfers to religious institutions. …
The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson
The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson
All Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court’s attempt to create a standard for evaluating whether the Establishment Clause is violated by religious governmental speech, such as the public display of the Ten Commandments or the Pledge of Allegiance, is a total failure. The Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has been termed “convoluted,” “a muddled mess,” and “a polite lie.” Unwilling to either allow all governmental religious speech or ban it entirely, the Court is in need of a coherent standard for distinguishing the permissible from the unconstitutional. Thus far, no Justice has offered such a standard.
A careful reading of the history of the framing …
Commentary: Exploiting Mixed Speech, Caroline Mala Corbin
Commentary: Exploiting Mixed Speech, Caroline Mala Corbin
Articles
The Supreme Court has been taking advantage of mixed speech—that is, speech that is both private and governmental—to characterize challenged speech in a way that ultimately permits the government to sponsor Christian speech. In Pleasant Grove City v. Summum, a free speech case where the government accepted a Christian Ten Commandments monument but rejected a Summum Seven Aphorisms monument, the Court held that privately donated monuments displayed in public parks were government speech as opposed to private speech and therefore not subject to free speech limits on viewpoint discrimination. In Town of Greece v. Galloway, an establishment case …