Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Religion In The Workplace: A Report On The Layers Of Relevant Law In The United States, William W. Van Alstyne Apr 2009

Religion In The Workplace: A Report On The Layers Of Relevant Law In The United States, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


The Public's Domain In Trademark Law: A First Amendment Theory Of The Consumer, Laura A. Heymann Apr 2009

The Public's Domain In Trademark Law: A First Amendment Theory Of The Consumer, Laura A. Heymann

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


I'Ll Huff And I'Ll Puff - But Then You'll Blow My Case Away: Dealing With Dismissed And Bad-Faith Defendants Under California's Anti-Slapp Statute, Jeremiah A. Ho Jan 2009

I'Ll Huff And I'Ll Puff - But Then You'll Blow My Case Away: Dealing With Dismissed And Bad-Faith Defendants Under California's Anti-Slapp Statute, Jeremiah A. Ho

Faculty Publications

This Article will demonstrate that, despite efforts to recognize SLAPPs and to safeguard our legal process from abuses, SLAPP suits and their underlying interference with the legitimate exercise of the right to petition can often engender new ways of creeping back onto the legal stage to wreak havoc on the private citizen - that the devious, shape-shifting Big Bad Wolf of First Amendment rights can return to reprise its role as the subversive villain and to trot unsuspecting litigants out to slaughter. After an introduction into the general world of SLAPPs and the specific history behind California's section 425.16, this …


Nobody's Fools: The Rational Audience As First Amendment Ideal, Lyrissa Lidsky Jan 2009

Nobody's Fools: The Rational Audience As First Amendment Ideal, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

Assumptions about audiences shape the outcomes of First Amendment cases. Yet the Supreme Court rarely specifies what its assumptions about audiences are, much less attempts to justify them. Drawing on literary theory, this Article identifies and defends two critical assumptions that emerge from First Amendment cases involving so-called "core" speech. The first is that audiences are capable of rationally assessing the truth, quality, and credibility of core speech. The second is that more speech is generally preferable to less. These assumptions, which I refer to collectively as the rational audience model, lie at the heart of the "marketplace of ideas" …


"Duty-Defining Power" And The First Amendment's Civil Domain, Timothy Zick Jan 2009

"Duty-Defining Power" And The First Amendment's Civil Domain, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

In Rethinking Free Speech and Civil Liability,1 Daniel Solove and Neil Richards attempt something truly ambitious. The authors seek to map coherent boundaries for the First Amendment’s vast civil domain. Their project merits serious attention. Currently, different rules apply to civil liability for speech depending on whether the liability arises in tort, contract, or property. Solove and Richards claim that these boundaries are unworkable, under-theorized, and in some cases destined to collide. They develop a framework for mapping the First Amendment’s civil domain that is based upon a distinction regarding the type of power the state exercises in various civil …