Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
A More Perfect Pickering Test: Janus V. Afscme Council 31 And The Problem Of Public Employee Speech, Alexandra J. Gilewicz
A More Perfect Pickering Test: Janus V. Afscme Council 31 And The Problem Of Public Employee Speech, Alexandra J. Gilewicz
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In June 2018, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited—and, for the American labor movement, long-feared—decision in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31. The decision is expected to have a major impact on public sector employee union membership, but could have further impact on public employees’ speech rights in the workplace. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito’s broad interpretation of whether work-related speech constitutes a “matter of public concern” may have opened the floodgates to substantially more litigation by employees asserting that their employers have violated their First Amendment rights. Claims that would have previously been unequivocally foreclosed may now …
The Political Party System As A Public Forum: The Incoherence Of Parties As Free Speech Associations And A Proposed Correction, Wayne Batchis
The Political Party System As A Public Forum: The Incoherence Of Parties As Free Speech Associations And A Proposed Correction, Wayne Batchis
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence addressing the associational rights of political parties is both highly consequential and deeply inconsistent. It dates back at least as far as the Court’s White Primary decisions more than a half-century ago. In recent decades, the Court has imposed an arguably ad hoc formula, striking down regulations on political parties on First Amendment grounds in some cases, while upholding them in others. From a jurisprudential perspective, critics might point to insufficiently principled distinctions between these cases. From a normative perspective, the very expansion of First Amendment rights to political parties, like the parallel extension to corporations …
In All Fairness: Using Political Broadcast Access Doctrine To Tailor Public Campaign Fund Matching, Andrew V. Moshirnia, Aaron T. Dozeman
In All Fairness: Using Political Broadcast Access Doctrine To Tailor Public Campaign Fund Matching, Andrew V. Moshirnia, Aaron T. Dozeman
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Recent United States Supreme Court decisions have undermined the viability of campaign public financing systems, a vital tool for fighting political corruption. First, Citizens United v. FEC allowed privately financed candidates and independent groups to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaigning. Publicly financed candidates now risk being vastly outspent. Second, Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom PAC v. Bennett invalidated a proportional fund matching system whereby privately financed candidates’ or independent groups’ spending triggered funds to publicly funded candidates. These decisions effectuate a libertarian speech doctrine: all speakers, individual or corporate, must be absolutely unburdened. To comply with this approach, …
Emphasizing Substance: Making The Case For A Shift In Political Speech Jurisprudence, Anastasia N. Niedrich
Emphasizing Substance: Making The Case For A Shift In Political Speech Jurisprudence, Anastasia N. Niedrich
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Political speech is vital to a functioning democracy and is highly protected. That much is hardly disputed. What courts, legal scholars, and those seeking to convey a political message do dispute is how political speech should be identified and protected, and who should decide what constitutes political speech. This Note looks at the history of political speech doctrine and critiques two intent-based approaches that have been proposed by First Amendment scholars to define political speech. This Note proposes a solution to many problems inherent in defining, identifying, and protecting political speech within intent-based frameworks, arguing that focusing on intent creates …
Is There An Obligation To Listen?, Leslie Gielow Jacobs
Is There An Obligation To Listen?, Leslie Gielow Jacobs
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Article thoroughly considers the question whether the constitutional guarantee of "freedom of speech" includes an obligation to listen. It first reviews the scopes of the right to speak, the right to listen, and the right to be left alone from things other than unwanted speech, and the relevance to each of physical location. It concludes that, consistent with constitutional doctrine and the Court's articulations, the government's ability to protect individuals from unwanted speech should not vary according to the listener's location. After noting that the actual protection of unwilling listeners may differ because of the different physical realities of …
Campus Pamphleteering: The Emerging Constitutional Standards, Morton M. Rosenfeld
Campus Pamphleteering: The Emerging Constitutional Standards, Morton M. Rosenfeld
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Beginning with Lovell v. City of Griffin, the Supreme Court has consistently held the distribution of handbills to be a fundamental right under the first amendment. Since Lovell, the Court has liberally construed the concept of a public forum where first amendment rights can be properly exercised. More recently, the Court has held that schools cannot arbitrarily or absolutely regulate students' constitutional rights of expression. These three principles would suggest great protection for handbilling rights on state university campuses. A further analysis of case law indicates that broad free speech standards governing such rights exist and that the …