Law Commons^™

Science As Speech, Natalie Ram

All Faculty Scholarship

In April 2015, researchers in China reported the successful genetic editing of human embryos using a new technology that promised to make gene editing easier and more effective than ever before. In the United States, the announcement drew immediate calls to regulate or prohibit
outright any use of this technology to alter human embryos, even for purely research purposes. The fervent response to the Chinese announcement was, in one respect, unexceptional. Proposals to regulate or prohibit scientific research following a new breakthrough occur with substantial frequency. Innovations in cloning technology and embryonic stem cell research have prompted similar outcries, and …

The Original Meaning Of "God": Using The Language Of The Framing Generation To Create A Coherent Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court’s attempt to create a standard for evaluating whether the Establishment Clause is violated by religious governmental speech, such as the public display of the Ten Commandments or the Pledge of Allegiance, is a total failure. The Court’s Establishment Clause jurisprudence has been termed “convoluted,” “a muddled mess,” and “a polite lie.” Unwilling to either allow all governmental religious speech or ban it entirely, the Court is in need of a coherent standard for distinguishing the permissible from the unconstitutional. Thus far, no Justice has offered such a standard.

A careful reading of the history of the framing …

Sacred Cows, Holy Wars: Exploring The Limits Of Law In The Regulation Of Raw Milk And Kosher Meat, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

In a free society law and religion seldom coincide comfortably, tending instead to reflect the inherent tension that often resides between the two. This is nowhere more apparent than in America, where the underlying principle upon which the first freedom enunciated by the Constitution's Bill of Rights is based ‒ the separation of church and state – is conceptually at odds with the pragmatic compromises that may be reached. But our adherence to the primacy of individual rights and civil liberties ‒ that any activity must be permitted if it is not imposed upon others without their consent, and if …

Antisemitism In The Academic Voice: Confronting Bigotry Under The First Amendment, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

The romanticized vision of life in the Ivory Tower - a peaceful haven where learned professors ponder higher thoughts and where students roam orderly quadrangles in quest of truth and other pleasures - has long been relegated to yesteryear. While universities like to nurture the perception that they are protectors of reasoned discourse, and indeed often perceive themselves as sacrosanct places of culture in a chaotic world, the modern campus, of course, is not quite so wonderful.

This chapter examines the relationship between antisemitic and anti-Zionist speech and conduct, how they both play out on contemporary university campuses - and …

Book Review: The Free Press Crisis Of 1800: Thomas Cooper's Trial For Seditious Libel, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

This article was an invited book review of a book of the same title by Peter Charles Hoffer. Hoffer, Distinguished Research Professor of History at the University of Georgia, has published this accessible case history as part of the University Press of Kansas’s Landmark Law Cases & American Society series, which he co-edits.

The book discusses one of the cases arising as a result of the Alien & Sedition Act under the presidency of John Adams, mostly targeting Republicans who editorialized against the Adams administration.

Ten Years After: Bartnicki V. Vopper As Laboratory For First Amendment Advocacy And Analysis, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

How many ways can one approach a First Amendment analysis? What influences a lawyer or a judge to select one analytical approach over another? And what is the long-term effect of a court's choice of one over another? In Bartnicki v. Vopper, a 2001 case in which the U.S. Supreme Court considered federal and state statutes prohibiting the disclosure of illegally intercepted telephone conversations, we are privileged to have a small laboratory through which to study the first two questions. And, from the vantage point of ten years, we ought to be able to make some informed predictions as to …

In An Academic Voice: Antisemitism And Academy Bias, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

Current events and the recent literature strongly suggest that antisemitism and anti-Zionism are often conflated and can no longer be viewed as distinct phenomena. The following paper provides an overview of contemporary media and scholarship concerning antisemitic/anti-Zionist events and rhetoric on college campuses. This analysis leads to the conclusion that those who are naive about campus antisemitism should exercise greater vigilance and be more aggressive in confronting the problem.

Astrachan And Easton: Fight Wikileaks Case In Court, Not In Cyberspace, James B. Astrachan, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Whither Newspapers? Wither Newspapers?, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Betraying Truth: Ethics Abuse In Middle East Reporting, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article presents a brief overview of press freedom under the First Amendment, attempts to create a working definition of media “objectivity,” examines various codes of professional ethics for journalists, and analyzes specific cases in which such standards have allegedly been abused or abandoned in Middle East reporting.

A House Divided: Earl Caldwell, The New York Times, And The Quest For A Testimonial Privilege, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

In the 1972 case of Branzburg v. Hayes, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment does not protect journalists who refuse to reveal their confidential sources or news gathering product in response to a federal grand jury subpoena. That decision has remained vital for 35 years and has reverberated through a number of recent high-profile cases. Despite some form of protection in nearly every state court, reporters haled before a federal judge may have no recourse save prison. Devastating as Branzburg has been for the so-called journalist's privilege, its negative impact has been far broader. Branzburg is one of …

The Colonel's Finest Campaign: Robert R. Mccormick And Near V. Minnesota, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

Today, media corporations and their professional and trade associations, along with organizations like Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the American Civil Liberties Union, carefully monitor litigation that implicates First Amendment values and decide whether, when, and how to intervene. It was not always so. Litigation by an institutional press to avoid or create doctrinal precedent under the First Amendment really began with the appointment of Col. Robert R. McCormick to head the ANPA's Committee on Freedom of the Press in the spring of 1928 and his involvement in Near v. Minnesota beginning that fall. Because of McCormick's …

Defending Truth: Legal And Psychological Aspects Of Holocaust Denial, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

From the still-burning embers of the Holocaust we have come once again to learn the terrible truth, that the power of Evil still lurks among the nations of the world, and cannot be underestimated. Nor can the effect of the spoken and written word, which in modern times must be taken in tandem with the violence of terrorism. Part I describes the background and nature of Holocaust denial, tracing the Nazis' adoption of a plan for the A "Final Solution of the Jewish Problem" through the post-War Nuremberg Trials to the present day. Part II examines the tension between free …

Some Learning Opportunities From The Imus Affair, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

The author discusses the broader issues of free speech under the surface of the Don Imus affair, where that commentator made a gratuitous slur about the Rutgers women's basketball team. He balances this gaff against the good deeds of the same personality, comparing this with similar provocative remarks made by other well-known public figures. The media is cited for an overreaction to the Imus incident, and all these components are discussed in light of what free speech means.

Scholarly And Scientific Boycotts Of Israel: Abusing The Academic Enterprise, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

Veritas vos liberabit, chanted the scholastics of yesteryear. The truth will set you free, echo their latter-day counterparts in the academy.

Universities like themselves to be perceived as places of culture in a chaotic world, protectors of reasoned discourse, peaceful havens for learned professors roaming orderly quadrangles and pondering higher thoughts-a community of scholars seeking knowledge in sylvan tranquility.

The real world of higher education, of course, is not quite so wonderful.

Instead of a feast for unfettered intellectual curiosity, much of the modern academy is dominated by curricular deconstructionists who disdain western civilization, people who call themselves multiculturalists but, …

Incitement In The Mosques: Testing The Limits Of Free Speech And Religious Liberty, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

In times of terror and tension, civil liberties are at their greatest peril. Nowadays, no individual rights are more in jeopardy than the freedoms of speech and religion. This is true particularly for followers of Islam, whose leaders have become increasingly radical in both their preaching and practice. "Kill the Jews!" and "Kill the Americans!" are chants heard regularly in many Middle Eastern mosques, as frightful echoes of the fatwa are issued by today's quintessential terrorist, Osama bin Laden. The incitement continues unabated to this day. In April of 2004, for example, a Muslim preacher at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in …

The Other Sullivan Case, Garrett Epps, Garrett Epps

All Faculty Scholarship

The standard triumphalist narrative of NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN celebrates the Supreme Court's defense of free speech and press in the case's vindication of powerful journalistic institution. Ignored in this story is the story of the local defendants, civil rights leaders in Alabama who had their solvency threatened by the state courts' vindictive action against them. These defendants challenged the segregated proceedings used in court to affix liability to them—but the Supreme Court ignored their arguments and ignored the racial-equality and individual-rights aspects of the case. From their point of view, SULLIVAN might be so unalloyed a triumph.

Ub Viewpoint – Journalists May Face Contempt For Protecting Sources, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Adjudicative Speech And The First Amendment, Christopher J. Peters

All Faculty Scholarship

While political speech - speech intended to influence political decisions - is afforded the highest protection under the First Amendment, adjudicative speech - speech intended to influence court decisions - is regularly and systematically constrained by rules of evidence, canons of professional ethics, judicial gag orders, and similar devices. Yet court decisions can be as important, both to the litigants and to society at large, as political decisions. How then can our practice of severely constraining adjudicative speech be justified as consistent with First Amendment principles?

This Article attempts to answer that question in a way that is informative about …

Public Importance: Balancing Proprietary Rights And The Right To Know, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

Articulating a coherent, all-encompassing First Amendment doctrine for freedom of speech and of the press has so far eluded every scholar who has tried, not least because of the variety of analytical approaches and potentially dispositive factors in Supreme Court jurisprudence. For example, the same regulation might be enforceable in one medium, but not another; in one forum, but not another. Enforceability may depend on the regulator's purpose and drafting skill, or not, depending in turn on whether the speech deserves full protection, some protection, or no protection at all. Sometimes enforceability depends on the speaker's intent, or knowledge, or …

Ub Viewpoint – Dissolving The Shadows, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

"Charitable Choice" And The Accountability Challenge: Reconciling The Need For Regulation With The First Amendment Religion Clauses, Michele E. Gilman

All Faculty Scholarship

Since 1996, Congress has included charitable choice provisions in several social welfare statutes to encourage the participation of religious organizations in administering government-funded social service programs. In this Article, Professor Michele Gilman discusses the lack of accountability to beneficiaries that occurs when public funds are given to religious organizations for secular programs, and she proposes solutions to this problem. As Professor Gilman explains, doctrines that constrain abuses of governmental discretion, such as administrative procedure acts and constitutional restrictions, generally do not apply when public programs are privatized. Moreover, religious organizations are often insulated from public scrutiny because of First Amendment …

Rewriting Near V. Minnesota: Creating A Complete Definition Of Prior Restraint, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

The decision in Near v. Minnesota, while establishing the prior restraint doctrine as a critical element for First Amendment analysis, failed to give a definition of prior restraint. The result has been inconsistent and unpredictable application of the doctrine as well as diminished protection of free expression. This article takes the next critical step in the journey begun by Near v. Minnesota; it attempts to create a comprehensive definition of prior restraint using the principles of separation of powers. Because all three branches can create 'prior restraints,' the prevention of unconstitutional restraints will necessitate different safeguards depending on which branch …

The Neglected History Of The Prior Restraint Doctrine: Rediscovering The Link Between The First Amendment And The Separation Of Powers, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

The prior restraint doctrine, once so fundamental to Constitutional Jurisprudence, has lost much of its effectiveness over the years. Nevertheless, prior restraint doctrine is crucial to preserving the line between protected and unprotected speech. One of the fundamental problems that contribute to the current ineffectiveness of prior restraint doctrine is that there exists no comprehensive definition of "prior restraint". This article chronicles the historical roots of prior restraint in order to arrive at a generally accepted legal definition. Through the course of this historical journey, the article yields a heretofore unexplored aspect of prior restraint doctrine, namely that prior restraint …

Sovereign Indignity? Values, Borders And The Internet: A Case Study, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

This article focuses on the publication ban issued by a Canadian court in a notorious murder trial, and the popular reaction to the publication ban, as a case study of the new global communications environment. Part I reconstructs the factual circumstances that provoked the ban, as well as the responses of the media, the legal establishment, and the public. Part II examines the ban itself, the constitutional challenge mounted by the media, and the landmark Dagenais decision. Part III reflects on the meaning of the entire episode for law, journalism, and national sovereignty.

The Dagenais decision demonstrates the continued independence …

Holocaust Denial And The First Amendment: The Quest For Truth In A Free Society, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

From the ashes of the Holocaust we have come once again to learn the terrible truth, that the power of Evil cannot be underestimated. Nor can the effect of the spoken and written word. It has been but a half-century since the liberation of Nazi death camps, a little more than a decade since the First International Conference on the Holocaust and Human Rights, and a few short years since the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum first put on display its documentation of horror. Yet today that form of historical revisionism popularly called "Holocaust denial" abounds worldwide in all its …

Two Wrongs Mock A Right: Overcoming The Cohen Maledicta That Bar First Amendment Protection For Newsgathering, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

In Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., Justice Byron R. White wrote that the First Amendment offers no protection from the enforcement of "generally applicable laws" against newsgatherers and that First Amendment protection applies only to information that has been "lawfully acquired." This Article shows that these doctrines are not only false, but have already done serious damage to First Amendment interests. It surveys lower court decisions from around the country to demonstrate the doctrines' pernicious influence, then it evaluates alternative solutions to the problem. The article concludes that the most effective, if least likely, solution would be a rule that …

Free Speech Faces Hostile Environment: An Aggressive Hunt For Sex Harassment Leaves Plenty Of Wreckage, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

Take the case of James Maas, who has been teaching at Cornell University for more than 30 years and whose Psychology 101 is perhaps the largest undergraduate course in the country (attracting about 1,000 students every semester). He was won numerous teaching awards. In 1994, Mr. Maas was called before Cornell's "Professional Ethics Committee" to defend himself against charges of sexual harassment. The allegations centered around his "overly friendly and affectionate behavior" - which, it turns out, were hugs and occasional social kisses, most often in front of class or family.

The most notable example of a professor who stood …

Closing The Barn Door After The Genie Is Out Of The Bag: Recognizing A "Futility Principle" In First Amendment Jurisprudence, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

This article argues for a simple proposition: the First Amendment imposes a presumption against the suppression of speech when suppression would be futile. Suppression is futile when the speech is available to the same audience through some other medium or at some other place. The government can overcome this presumption of futility only when it asserts an important interest that is unrelated to the content of the speech in question, and only when the suppression directly advances that interest.

In Part I, the article explores the role that this unarticulated "futility principle" has played in Supreme Court and other decisions …

Business Information And "Personal Data": Some Common-Law Observations About The Eu Draft Data Protection Directive, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

Discusses the public interest in the free flow of information.