Law Commons^™

First Amendment, Second Fiddle? Free Speech In New Hampshire‘S Constitution, Adam Rick

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “A car dealer in Concord, New Hampshire recently challenged the city zoning board‘s denial of its application to replace its existing readerboard (with manually changeable letters) with an electronic sign. The dealer argued that the city‘s zoning ordinance, prohibiting “[s]igns which move or create an illusion of movement except those parts which solely indicate date, time, or temperature,” constituted an unconstitutional restriction on free speech under the First Amendment. The trial court agreed, but the New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed, applying the Central Hudson test and finding that the ordinance reached no “broader than necessary to meet and advance …

Restraining False Light: Constitutional And Common Law Limits On A "Troublesome Tort", James B. Lake

Federal Communications Law Journal

The defamation tort is the common law's established remedy for false speech that causes reputational and emotional injury. That tort is subject to intricate constitutional, legislative, and common law rules that have evolved over decades. The false light invasion of privacy tort also provides a potential cause of action in response to injurious falsehood. False light, however, has been subject to much less judicial and legislative scrutiny than defamation. As a result, courts often are uncertain about the proper limits on false light and, in some cases, have countenanced false light claims that would have failed if filed as defamation …

Finding A Place For Embedded Advertising Without Eroding The First Amendment: An Analysis Of The Blurring Line Between Verisimilar Programming And Commercial Speech, Jacob J. Strain

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Conditions On Taking The Initiative: The First Amendment Implications Of Subject Matter Restrictions On Ballot Initiatives, Anna Skiba-Crafts

Michigan Law Review

Nearly half of U.S. states offer a ballot initiative process that citizens may use to pass legislation or constitutional amendments by a popular vote. Some states, however, impose substantive restrictions on the types of initiatives citizens may submit to the ballot for a vote-precluding, for example, initiatives lowering drug penalties or initiatives related to religion. Circuit courts are split on whether and how such restrictions implicate the First Amendment. This Note argues that-rather than limiting "expressive conduct" protected only minimally by the First Amendment, or limiting pure conduct that does not garner any First Amendment protectionsubject matter restrictions on ballot …

Zero-Sum Judicial Elections: Balancing Free Speech And Impartiality Through Recusal Reform, David K. Stott

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Guns And Speech Technologies: How The Right To Bear Arms Affects Copyright Regulations Of Speech Technologies, Edward Lee

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article examines the possible effect the Supreme Court's landmark Second Amendment ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller will have on future cases brought under the Free Press Clause.' Based on the text and history of the Constitution, the connection between the two Clauses is undeniable, as the Heller Court itself repeatedly suggested. Only two provisions in the entire Constitution protect individual rights to a technology: the Second Amendment's right to bear "arms" and the Free Press Clause's right to the freedom of the "press," meaning the printing press. Both rights were viewed, moreover, as pre-existing, natural rights to …

Whither Newspapers? Wither Newspapers?, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Egalitarian First Amendment: Its History And A Critique On The Grounds Of Text, Rights, Negative Liberty, And Our Republican Constitutional Structure, Zachary C. Larsen

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Speech & (And) Election Law: Freedom Of Speech Vs. Anti-Discrimination Laws, David Bernstein, Andrew Koppelman, Kenneth L. Marcus, Eugene Volokh

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.

A New Battleground For Free Speech: The Impact Of Snyder V. Phelps, Jason M. Dorsky

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “On September 25, 1789, the First Congress of the United States put forth a set of constitutional amendments, ten of which would later become the Bill of Rights. The first of these amendments states, ―Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech . . . . In subsequent caselaw, the U.S. Supreme Court has applied this prohibition to the federal government, as well as state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. Although this appears to be a simple standard to follow, history has proven otherwise, and …

Tinker And Viewpoint Discrimination, John E. Taylor

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Debunking Blackstonian Copyright, Shyamkrishna Balganesh

All Faculty Scholarship

This is a review of Neil Weinstock Netanel’s Copyright’s Paradox (2008).

The Life Of The Mind And A Life Of Meaning: Reflections On Fahrenheit 451, Rodney A. Smolla

Michigan Law Review

Fahrenheit 451 still speaks to us, vibrantly and passionately, still haunts and vexes and disturbs. The novel has sold millions of copies, was reset for a fiftieth anniversary printing, and continues to be assigned reading in middle school, high school, and college courses. That power to endure is well worth contemplation, both for what it says about Ray Bradbury's literary imagination, and, more powerfully, for what it teaches us about our recent past, our present, and our own imagined future. First Amendment jurisprudence has taken giant leaps since Fahrenheit 451 was written, and American society has managed to avoid the …

Establishing Inequality, Gene R. Nichol

Michigan Law Review

Part I outlines Nussbaum's thesis and her similarly interesting, if perhaps not always completely consistent, applications of it. Part II touches on some challenges and potential shortcomings her theory presents-for clearly there are such. But, in Part III, I argue that her wide-ranging study of the work of the religion clauses nonetheless touches something residing at the core of American citizenship. No bosses. No masters. No insiders. None outcast. Finally, and far more idiosyncratically, in Part IV I explore and expand on Nussbaum's thesis in light of a modestly serious and rather public dispute over religious equality that occurred at …

Rationing The Infinite, Leonard M. Niehoff

Michigan Law Review

This Review raises a number of objections to Baker's arguments and proposals. Furthermore, this Review raises the fundamental question of whether Baker's central operating assumption-that media is a scarce resource that should be fairly distributed-remains timely in light of the far-reaching and fast-paced changes wrought by the internet. Nevertheless, this Review also recognizes that, as with Baker's prior works, Media Concentration and Democracy makes a serious contribution to the discussion of the political, social, and economic dynamics that challenge the existence of a strong and independent media. Media Concentration and Democracy does a better job of raising questions than of …

The Mother's Milk Of Politics Is Corrupting Absolutely, Dan Walker

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Generally Applicable Laws And The First Amendment, David S. Bogen

David S. Bogen

No abstract provided.

Student Speech In Public Schools: A Comprehensive Analytical Framework Based On The Role Of Public Schools In Democratic Education, Curtis G. Bentley

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Contents, First Amendment Law Review

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punishing Public School Students For Bashing Principals, Teachers & Classmates In Cyberspace: The Speech Issue The Supreme Court Must Now Resolve, Clay Calvert

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Exorcising Our Free Exercise Jurisprudence: A New Interpretation Of Free Exercise In Pleasant Glade Assembly Of God V. Schubert, Thomas Clark

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

This Court Took A Wrong Turn With Bates: Why The Supreme Court Should Revisit Lawyer Advertising, Ralph H. Brock

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Divided We Fall: Religion, Politics, And The Lemon Entaglements Prong, Stephen M. Feldman

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Propagating A Lemon: How The Supreme Court Establishes Religion In The Name Of Neutrality, Anita Y. Woundenberg

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bring Your Dogma To Work Day: The Workplace Religious Freedom Act Of 2007 And The Public Workplace, Gretchen S. Futrell

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Drawing The Line: Buckley'S Impact On The Intersection Of Contributions And The First Amendment, Stefanie Dresdner Lincoln

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cybersmears And John Doe: How Far Should First Amendment Protection Of Anonymous Interest Speakers Extend, Jonthan D. Jones

First Amendment Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Content Neutrality: Understanding Content-Based Promotion Of Democratic Speech, Marvin Ammori

Federal Communications Law Journal

Scholars and judges generally assume that the cornerstone of free speech doctrine is the distinction between content-based and content-neutral laws. Despite its wide acceptance, the distinction lacks any precedential or normative basis, unless it also accounts for another equally important distinction. The scholars' conventional view of content-analysis overlooks the difference between the government banning a book or recommending it. Content-based laws that suppress specific content, like banning a television show, should be problematic, but content-based laws that promote specific content, such as promoting educational and political shows, should not be.

Precedent and the First Amendment's underlying normative concerns both require …