Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
United States V. Stevens: Win, Loss, Or Draw For Animals?, David N. Cassuto
United States V. Stevens: Win, Loss, Or Draw For Animals?, David N. Cassuto
David N Cassuto
Robert J. Stevens, proprietor of “Dogs of Velvet and Steel,” was indicted for marketing dog-fighting videos in violation of 18 U.S.C. §48, a law criminalizing visual or auditory depictions of animals being “intentionally mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed” if such conduct violated federal or state law where “the creation, sale, or possession [of such materials]” takes place.” The law aimed principally at makers and distributors of “crush videos” wherein women wearing high heels and depicted from the waist down, grind small animals to death. However, the language of 18 U.S.C. §48 extended to dog-fighting as well. Stevens challenged the law …
The Fight For Free Speech, Even If It's Offensive, Alan E. Garfield
The Fight For Free Speech, Even If It's Offensive, Alan E. Garfield
Alan E Garfield
No abstract provided.
Freedom Of Speech And The ‘Occupy’ Protests: ‘Narrowly Tailored To Further Significant Government Interests’, Mel Cousins
Freedom Of Speech And The ‘Occupy’ Protests: ‘Narrowly Tailored To Further Significant Government Interests’, Mel Cousins
Mel Cousins
This note examines the spate of recent court decisions concerning efforts by Occupy protestors in various cities of the USA to prevent the removal (or restriction) of their protests. In general, though by no means in all cases, the courts, applying existing freedom of speech principles, have upheld the protestors’ right to protest to some extent but have placed narrow limits around the manner in which this right may be exercised. Following a short introduction (Part 1), Part 2 discuses the approach which has been taken by the courts in recent cases. The approach adopted contrasts sharply with the Supreme …
Details: Specific Facts And The First Amendment, Ashutosh A. Bhagwat
Details: Specific Facts And The First Amendment, Ashutosh A. Bhagwat
Ashutosh Bhagwat
First Amendment theory and judicial decisions have traditionally focused their analysis primarily on the regulation and suppression of ideas, opinions, and advocacy. The great free speech disputes of the Twentieth Century have produced a robust body of law which, at least in the political sphere, gives very strong protection to such speech. But ideas and opinions are not the only sorts of information conveyed by speech. What about facts, and in particular, what about specific facts, what I call details? Cases such as New York Times v. Sullivan and its progeny discuss the proper treatment of false facts, but what …
Details: Specific Facts And The First Amendment, Ashutosh A. Bhagwat
Details: Specific Facts And The First Amendment, Ashutosh A. Bhagwat
Ashutosh Bhagwat
First Amendment theory and judicial decisions have traditionally focused their analysis primarily on the regulation and suppression of ideas, opinions, and advocacy. The great free speech disputes of the Twentieth Century have produced a robust body of law which, at least in the political sphere, gives very strong protection to such speech. But ideas and opinions are not the only sorts of information conveyed by speech. What about facts, and in particular, what about specific facts, what I call details? Cases such as New York Times v. Sullivan and its progeny discuss the proper treatment of false facts, but what …
The Structural Constitutional Principle Of Republican Legitimacy, Mark D. Rosen
The Structural Constitutional Principle Of Republican Legitimacy, Mark D. Rosen
Mark D. Rosen
Representative democracy does not spontaneously occur by citizens gathering to choose laws. Instead, republicanism takes place within an extensive legal framework that determines who gets to vote, how campaigns are conducted, what conditions must be met for representatives to make valid law, and many other things. Many of the “rules-of-the-road” that operationalize republicanism have been subject to constitutional challenges in recent decades. For example, lawsuits have been brought against “partisan gerrymandering” (which has led to most congressional districts not being party-competitive, but instead being safely Republican or Democratic) and against onerous voter identification requirements (which reduce the voting rates of …
When Is A Lie An Affront To The Law?, Alan E. Garfield
When Is A Lie An Affront To The Law?, Alan E. Garfield
Alan E Garfield
No abstract provided.
Dropping F-Bombs At The Supreme Court, Alan E. Garfield
Dropping F-Bombs At The Supreme Court, Alan E. Garfield
Alan E Garfield
No abstract provided.
To Swear Or Not To Swear: Using Foul Language During A Supreme Court Oral Argument, Alan Garfield
To Swear Or Not To Swear: Using Foul Language During A Supreme Court Oral Argument, Alan Garfield
Alan E Garfield
This essay considers the provocative question of whether it is strategically wise for a lawyer to use foul language during a Supreme Court oral argument. This issue doesn’t come up often. But it does when a lawyer claims his client’s First Amendment rights were violated when the government punished him for using foul language. If the lawyer doesn’t use his client’s offensive words, he risks conceding that these words are so horrid they warrant suppression. But if he does use the words, he risks alienating justices who find the words unseemly. The essay uses the “fleeting expletives” case that was …
The Supreme Court As Prometheus: Breathing Life Into The Corporate Supercitizen, Robert Sprague, Mary Ellen Wells
The Supreme Court As Prometheus: Breathing Life Into The Corporate Supercitizen, Robert Sprague, Mary Ellen Wells
Robert Sprague
This article examines the legal status of the corporation in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporations have political free speech rights equivalent to natural persons. In Citizens United, Justice Kennedy wrote that corporations were disadvantaged persons because the government had intruded upon their freedom of speech. The Citizens United majority portrays a misleading image of corporations. It is true most corporations are owned by small groups of individuals, managed by their owners, and limited in size and revenues. But what the Citizens United majority conveniently ignores is one particular attribute …
Citizens United And The Ineluctable Question Of Corporate Citizenship, Amy Sepinwall
Citizens United And The Ineluctable Question Of Corporate Citizenship, Amy Sepinwall
Amy J. Sepinwall
As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, corporations and individuals now enjoy the same rights to spend money on ads supporting or opposing candidates for office. Those concerned about the role of money in politics have much to decry about the decision. But the threat to democracy posed by allowing wealthy corporations to function as political speakers arises as well under a regime that allows wealthy individuals to do so. If we are not prepared to limit individuals’ expenditures on political speech, we will have to find a way to distinguish individuals’ and corporations’ free speech …
Rules Of General Applicability, Jeffrey M. Shaman
Rules Of General Applicability, Jeffrey M. Shaman
Jeffrey M. Shaman
In some instances, the Supreme Court has held that, despite their restrictive effect upon speech or religion, rules of general applicability are exempt from oversight under the First Amendment. In Arcara v. Cloud Books, the Court ruled that the Free Speech Clause was not violated by a rule of general applicability even where it had a restrictive effect upon expressive activity. Arcara was an isolated decision that has enjoyed little influence in subsequent decisions involving free speech. On the other hand, in Employment Division v. Smith, the Court effectuated a major doctrinal revision to the Free Exercise Clause by ruling …