Law Commons^™

Brief Amici Curiae Of Electronic Frontier Foundation, 1851 Center For Constitutional Law, And Profs. Jonathan Entin, David F. Forte, Andrew Geronimo, Raymond Ku, Stephen Lazarus, Kevin Francis O’Neill, Margaret Tarkington, Aaron H. Caplan, And Eugene Volokh In Support Of Respondent-Appellant, Joni Bey And Rebecca Rasawehr V. Jeffrey Rasawehr, Supreme Court Of Ohio (Case No. 2019-0295), David Forte, Stephen R. Lazarus, Kevin F. O'Neill, Jonathan L. Entin, Andrew Geronimo, Raymond Ku, Margaret Tarkington, Aaron H. Kaplan, Eugene Volokh

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

The brief argues that the Third District Court of Appeals, in violation of the First Amendment, erred in upholding an injunction that barred defendant from any online postings regarding plaintiff, whether or not those postings were to plaintiff or to third parties.

Why We Need Reed: Unmasking Pretext In Anti-Panhandling Legislation, Joseph Mead

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of areas where asking for help is restricted or banned. Whether called begging, panhandling, or solicitation, cities were spurred on by concerns of business owners and residents to ban or highly restrict this type of speech from occurring in public areas. Yet laws such as these have been repeatedly struck down by courts in recent months, fueled in large part by the Supreme Court’s decision in Reed v. City of Gilbert.

In this essay I argue that, at least in the context of anti-panhandling legislation, Reed …

A First Amendment Compass: Navigating The Speech Clause With A Five-Step Analytical Framework, Kevin F. O'Neill

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This Article is designed to serve as a First Amendment “compass,” explaining the Speech Clause while offering a systematic method for analyzing any claim asserted under it. The need for this Article stems from the fact that First Amendment law is more than ever a labyrinth. For students, lawyers, and judges alike, it is difficult even to identify--much less to distinguish and apply-- the various strands of applicable precedent. This is because the Supreme Court has developed a dense mass of overlapping doctrines: drawing distinctions between content-based1 and content-neutral restrictions; drawing further distinctions between fully-protected and “low-level” categories of expression; …

The Absoluteness Of The First Amendment, Stephen W. Gard

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

Despite an urgent need, the reality is that today we have no unifying free speech theory. Instead, the recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court suggest that doctrinal confusion reigns. Ironically, I would suggest that the cause of the present doctrinal confusion is not that insufficient attention has been paid to technical free speech issues, but rather that modern first amendment thinking has been dominated by "balancers." The poverty of the balancing approach, be it ad hoc or definitional in character, stems from its reliance on pragmatic considerations rather than on fundamental principles embodied in the enduring legacy of …