Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Flag Salute Cases And The First Amendment, Stephen W. Gard
The Flag Salute Cases And The First Amendment, Stephen W. Gard
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
The flag salute cases have been a source of endless fascination for legal and historical scholars. Most of this large body of scholarship has focused on the apparent oddity of Justice Frankfurter's view that there was no constitutional infirmity in the "petty tyranny" of a governmental requirement that school children engage in a hypocritical affirmation of belief. Unfortunately, the doctrinal importance of the opinions of Justices Jackson and Frankfurter in the flag salute cases as contrasting statements on the interpretation of the freedom of speech guarantee of the first amendment and the function of the judiciary in preserving our most …
Regulating Pornography: Recent Legal Trends, Alan C. Weinstein
Regulating Pornography: Recent Legal Trends, Alan C. Weinstein
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
Since the Supreme Court's 1976 decision in Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc., 427 U.S. 50 (1976) local governments have been permitted to single out adult bookstores and theaters for special regulatory treatment.' In the wake of Young, many municipalities enacted "pornography zoning" ordinances based on the Detroit dispersion model. Observing this trend in 1978, the Harvard Law Review noted that these municipalities were interpreting Young as approving pornography zoning as constitutionally acceptable "in nearly all circumstances." 2 This interpretation seemed incorrect, however, to the Review's editors: "Detroit's pornography zoning was found to satisfy three established First Amendment criteria; future …
Fighting Words As Free Speech, Stephen W. Gard
Fighting Words As Free Speech, Stephen W. Gard
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
It is now settled that "above all else, the first amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." Despite the universal acceptance of this general principle, the United States Supreme Court has created several exceptions. In appropriate cases libel, obscenity, commercial speech, and offensive language may be censored without contravention of the first amendment guarantee of freedom of expression. The source of each of these exceptions to the general principle of governmental neutrality regarding the content of expression is Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.