Law Commons^™

Look Who's Talking: Conscience, Complicity, And Compelled Speech, B. Jessie Hill

Indiana Law Journal

Compelled speech claims, which arise under the Free Speech Clause, and complicity claims, which usually arise under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), are structurally similar. In each case, an individual claims that the government is forcing her to participate in a particular act that violates her religious or moral beliefs and imperatives, sending a false and undesired message to others and causing a form of spiritual or dignitary harm. It is therefore no surprise that compelled speech claims are often raised together with complicity claims in cases where religious individuals challenge the application of generally applicable laws to themselves. …

Compelled Speech And The Regulatory State, Alan K. Chen

Indiana Law Journal

Since the Supreme Court’s 1943 decision in West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, it has been axiomatic that the First Amendment prohibits the government not only from censoring speech, but also from compelling it. The central holding of Barnette itself is largely uncontroversial—it seems obvious that the First Amendment’s free speech clause means that no government may require people to espouse or reproduce an ideological statement against their will. But the Court has extended the compelled speech doctrine to stop the government from forcing people to make even truthful, factual statements. These claims have resulted in some of the …

Compelled Speech And Proportionality, Alexander Tsesis

Indiana Law Journal

This Article argues for a proportional First Amendment approach to compelled speech jurisprudence. It discusses the evolution of doctrine and how it led to recent opinions finding unconstitutional consumer protection, health disclosure, and collective bargaining statutes. In place of the currently formalistic approach, the Article argues for a transparent balancing of interests to avoid litigants’ opportunistic reliance on categorical First Amendment doctrines. Missing from the recent decisions that relied on the compelled speech doctrine is any systematic or contextual weighing of private and public concerns about disclosure regulations. The Roberts Court has been rather formalistic and categorical in its compelled …

Trafficking Technology: A Look At Different Approaches To Ending Technology-Facilitated Human Trafficking, David Barney

Pepperdine Law Review

In 2018, many believe that slavery is an antiquated concept. But as with anything else, if it has not become extinct, it has evolved with time. Human trafficking is no different. Each year, millions of men, women and children are trafficked in the United States, and internationally, and forced to work against their will. Through the rise of technology and an increasingly globalized world, traffickers have learned to use technology as a tool to help facilitate the trafficking of persons and to sell those victims to others they never could have reached before. But what are we doing about it? …

Remedies Symposium: Remedies And The Government's Constitutionally Harmful Speech, Helen Norton

ConLawNOW

Although governments have engaged in expression from their inception, only recently have we begun to consider the ways in which the government’s speech sometimes threatens our constitutional rights. In my contribution to this symposium, I seek to show that although the search for constitutional remedies for the government’s harmful expression is challenging, it is far from futile. This search is also increasingly important at a time when the government’s expressive powers continue to grow—along with its willingness to use these powers for disturbing purposes and with troubling consequences.

More specifically, in certain circumstances, injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or damages can …

U.S. Supreme Court Surveys: 2016 Term. Matal V. Tam: Free Speech Meets "Disparaging" Trademarks In The Supreme Court, Niki Kuckes

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Citizenship Education And The Free Exercise Of Religion, Tyll Van Geel

Akron Law Review

Part One of this article provides a broad-brush overview of constitutional doctrine as it bears on citizenship education in the public schools. The remaining parts of the article focus on a Free Exercise challenge to the introduction of a Callaneseque program of citizenship education in a public school. Part Two thus explicates Callan’s theory. Part Three outlines my approach to the Free Exercise Clause. Part Four applies that approach to a challenge brought against a Callanesque program of citizenship education. Part Five takes up other possible rights-based limits on the education power and offers a suggestion regarding how citizenship education …

What Counts As "Speech" In The First Place?: Determining The Scope Of The Free Speech Clause, R. George Wright

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Dissent, Free Speech, And The Continuing Search For The "Central Meaning" Of The First Amendment, Ronald J. Krotoszynski Jr.

Michigan Law Review

Since the Warren Court's expansive construction of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, there has been no shortage of legal scholarship aimed at justifying the remarkably broad protections afforded the freedom of speech under landmark cases such as Brandenburg v. Ohio, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, and Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. At the same time, in recent years, a growing chorus of free speech skeptics have made their voices heard.5 These legal scholars have questioned why a commitment to freedom of expression should displace other (constitutional) values such as equality, …

Rethinking The Clear And Present Danger Test, David R. Dow, R. Scott Shieldes

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure Of American Constitutional Law, Matthew D. Adler

Michigan Law Review

The Bill of Rights, by means of open-ended terms such as "freedom of speech," "equal protection," or "due process," refers to moral criteria, which take on constitutional status by virtue of being thus referenced. We can disagree about whether the proper methodology for judicial application of these criteria is originalist or nonoriginalist. The originalist looks, not to the true content of the moral criteria named by the Constitution, but to the framers' beliefs about that content; the nonoriginalist tries to determine what the criteria truly require, and ignores or gives less weight to the framers' views. Bracketing this disagreement, however, …

Rosenberger V. Rector & Visitors Of The University Of Virginia: The Myth Of The Content Neutral Establishment Clause, Mark Daniel Salzberg

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.