Law Commons^™

Hate Speech, Offensive Speech, And Public Discourse In America, Edward J. Eberle

Law Faculty Scholarship

In this article, Professor Eberle discusses several limitations on governmental power to regulate public discourse. After examining the United States Supreme Court decisions of R.A.V. v. City of St. Paula nd Wisconsin v. Mitchell, Professor Eberle concludes that government should refrain from regulating speech itself. Rather, any restrictions should focus strictly on the problematic conduct underlying the speech which justifies regulation. Professor Eberle also concludes that the Court has implicitly recognized two distinct subcategories of "content" discrimination and viewpoint discrimination. Both subcategories are presumptively unconstitutional and nominally subject to conventional strict scrutiny. The Court, however, finds viewpoint discrimination more dangerous …

Voice In Government: The People, Emily Calhoun

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Constitutionality Of Enjoining Criminal Street Gangs As Public Nuisances, Christopher S. Yoo

All Faculty Scholarship

California jurisdictions have increasingly used injunctions to combat the growth criminal street gangs. The use of civil sanctions to redress criminal activity raises difficult constitutional questions, potentially creating personal criminal codes that may infringe upon defendants’ substantive constitutional rights. In addition, employing civil remedies may deprive defendants of constitutional procedural protections that would have been provided if the jurisdiction had elected to deter the same behavior with available criminal sanctions. Although the use of injunctions places pressure on a number of substantive constitutional rights, including the freedom of association, freedom of expression, right to travel, the injunction terms will likely …

Different Religions, Different Politics: Evaluating The Role Of Competing Religious Traditions In American Politics And Law, Daniel O. Conkle

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In addressing the role of religion in politics and law, American political theory has strongly embraced the principle of religious equality. In this article, I explain how this principle has evolved and how it has nourished the privatization of religion and the secularization of public discourse by generating the view that public evaluations of religion are inappropriate. Under this view, religion is a private good that lacks public significance. As matters merely of private taste, matters that cannot be evaluated publicly, religious positions on political issues are not to be "imposed" on other citizens.

I challenge this reading of the …

Scrambling For Protection: The New Media And The First Amendment, Patrick Garry

Patrick M. Garry

In Scrambling for Protection, Patrick Garry asserts that such dramatic developments in electronic communications will radically change the way society communicates. Already, computer networks and bulletin boards are creating, in essence, electronic editorial pages on which people can register their viewpoints. Indeed, the new and increasingly interactive media promise to more significantly involve the public in the process of social communication. This concept of change lies at the heart of Scrambling for Protection. Garry offers models and guidelines for constitutionally redefining the press and asserts that, as both the press and the First Amendment move away from an apparently exclusive …