Law Commons^™

Is The First Amendment Entrenched? Rawls’ Curious Claim, Gordon D. Ballingrud

Gordon D Ballingrud

. This paper addresses a claim made by John Rawls in Lecture VI of Political Liberalism: any American constitutional amendment, ratified through Article V, which overturned the First Amendment would be illegitimate and justly ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Addressing the apparent contradiction that a duly enacted constitutional amendment can be unconstitutional, this paper reconstructs and critiques Rawls claim along two lines. First, I address Rawls’ philosophical claim as to the de facto entrenchment of the First Amendment, and the mechanisms that Rawls implicitly and explicitly purports to entrench it. I also address the claim that a First …

Texas Cheerleaders And The First Amendment: Can You Cheer For God At A Football Game?, Brett A. Geier

Brett A Geier

The Kountze High School Cheerleaders in Kountze, Texas last year placed religious messages on run-through banners at the pre-game ceremonies for its football team. When district officials directed the cheerleaders to cease placing the messages on the banners, the cheerleaders sought relief under the Free Exercise Clause and free speech doctrine. In the spring of 2013, the District Court enjoined the school from preventing the cheerleaders from placing religious messages on the banners stating that the act did not violated the Establishment Clause. This particular case has multiple issues that must be addressed: First Amendment conflict; free speech fora, religious …

"Rfra Exemptions From The Contraception Mandate: An Unconstitutional Accommodation Of Religion", Frederick Mark Gedicks, Rebecca G. Van Tassell

Frederick Mark Gedicks

Litigation surrounding use of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to exempt employers from the Affordable Care Act’s “contraception mandate” is moving steadily towards eventual resolution in the U.S. Supreme Court. Both opponents and supporters of the mandate, however, have overlooked Establishment Clause limits on such exemptions. The fiery religious-liberty rhetoric surrounding the mandate has obscured that RFRA is a “permissive” rather than “mandatory” accommodation of religion—that is, a voluntary government concession to religious belief and practice that is not required by the Free Exercise Clause. Permissive accommodations must satisfy Establishment Clause constraints, notably the requirement that the accommodation not impose …

After Caronia: First Amendment Concerns In Off-Label Promotion, Stephanie Greene

Stephanie Greene

After Caronia: First Amendment Concerns in Off-Label Promotion by Stephanie M. Greene* Abstract The government has successfully prosecuted pharmaceutical companies for off-label promotion of drugs, maintaining that such promotion impermissibly undermines the FDA’s pre-market approval process and jeopardizes the public health. In several recent cases, however, pharmaceutical companies have alleged that regulations prohibiting such promotion are unconstitutional because off-label promotion is protected under the First Amendment. Two recent Supreme Court cases contain language that gives broad protection to advertising and marketing in the pharmaceutical field. This paper questions the reach of these cases as applied to the practice of off-label …

Lost In The Compromise: Free Speech, Criminal Justice, And Attorney Pretrial Publicity, Margaret Tarkington

Margaret C Tarkington

Publicity by the prosecution and defense in the criminal proceedings against George Zimmerman again raised the question of the appropriate scope of First Amendment protection for attorney pretrial publicity. The Supreme Court, the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, and many scholars have viewed restrictions on attorney pretrial publicity as a compromise between the constitutional guarantees of free speech and a fair trial. Nevertheless, scholars advocate widely divergent levels of free speech protection for attorney pretrial publicity—ranging from core free speech protection to extremely limited protection. Traditional First Amendment doctrines fail to elucidate the proper scope of free speech rights for …

Visual Gut Punch: Persuasion, Emotion, And The Constitutional Meaning Of Graphic Disclosure, Ellen P. Goodman

ellen p. goodman

The ability of government to “nudge” with information mandates, or merely to inform consumers of risks, is circumscribed by First Amendment interests that have been poorly articulated in the relevant law and commentary. New graphic cigarette warning labels supplied courts with the first opportunity to assess the informational interests attending novel forms of product disclosures. The D.C. Circuit enjoined them as unconstitutional, compelled by a narrative that the graphic labels converted government from objective informer to ideological persuader, shouting its warning to manipulate consumer decisions. This interpretation will leave little room for graphic disclosure and is already being used to …

Flemming Rose's Rejection Of The American Free Speech Canon And The Poverty Of Comparative Constitutional Theory, Robert Kahn

Robert Kahn

In the fifteen page English language excerpt of his recent memoir The Tyranny of Silence, Danish publisher Flemming Rose gave an extended defense of his decision to run the cartoon images of the Prophet Mohammed. Current First Amendment doctrine almost certainly would treat this act as protected speech. But Rose barely mentions the First Amendment. Instead, he develops a highly personal theory of speech based on his experience in the Soviet Union and discussions with Salman Rushdie. Like many American legal academics Rose opposes bans on hate speech, but he does so for different reasons.

From a comparative law …

Lights, Camera, Arrest: The Stage Is Set For A Federal Resolution Of A Citizen's Right To Record The Police In Public, Taylor R. Robertson

Taylor R Robertson

Grab your cellphone, press the record button, and amaze your friends!

No advertisement like this exists in real life, of course, because the action is already universally automatic—it needs no encouragement or instruction. But aim the camera at the police and you could be arrested and face up to fifteen years in prison under some eavesdropping or wiretapping laws simply for recording the police in public speaking at volumes audible to any unassisted ear. While wiretapping laws were originally intended to protect citizens from the snooping detective, some states have effectively turned these laws into government protection from the watchful …

Our First Necessary Freedom: An Examination Of The Historical Argument For Religious Exemptions To The Department Of Health And Human Services’ Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act Mandate, Joseph T. Lo Galbo

Joseph T Lo Galbo

In its current impasse with the Obama administration regarding the Department of Health and Human Services’ implementation of regulations for group health plans covered under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Roman Catholic Church has argued that it possesses a historical right to a religious exemption from this generally applicable law. This contention runs contrary to contemporary legal scholarship that has largely concluded that the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause remains silent on the exemption issue. As both sides remain entrenched in their positions, the Church’s assertion necessitates a re-examination of the exemption question. This article attempts to …

Sex Is Less Offensive Than Violence: A Call To Update Obscenity Jurisprudence, Rachel Simon

Rachel Simon

This article addresses the gender bias presented by the disparate treatment of sex and violence under current obscenity jurisprudence. Under the controlling standard set forth by the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, sexual works may readily be regulated as obscenity, while violent works unequivocally may not. This article posits that this disparate treatment is the product of entrenched stereotypes about the way men and women “should” react to sex and violence, and notes the hypocrisy of failing to apply the same reasoning to assessments of violent versus sexual material.

First, reliance on “community standards” to define what material …

Presumed Imminence: Judicial Risk Assessment In The Post-9/11 World, Avidan Cover

Avidan Cover

Court opinions in the terrorism context are often distinguished by fact finding that relates to risk assessment. These risk assessments‑inherently policy decisions‑are influenced by cultural cognition and by cognitive errors common to probability determinations, particularly those made regarding highly dangerous and emotional events. In a post-9/11 world, in which prevention and intelligence are prioritized over prosecution, courts are more likely to overstate the potential harm, neglect the probability, and presume the imminence of terrorist attacks. As a result courts apt to defer to the government and require less evidence in support of measures that curtail civil liberties. This Article takes …

Institutionalized Word Taboo: The Continuing Saga Of Fcc Indecency Regulation, Christopher M. Fairman

Christopher M Fairman

Indecency regulation by the Federal Communication Commission and Supreme Court is the product of word taboo—the subconscious, emotional, involuntary avoidance of certain words out of fear that some harm will occur if they are spoken. Acting in tandem, the Court and the Commissioners create institutionalized word taboo based upon the assumption that broadcast media’s pervasive and intrusive presence into the home endangers unsupervised children. Technological innovation renders this premise invalid today, but institutionalized word taboo remains. This article (1) traces the rise of indecency regulation, (2) explains the invalidity of the assumptions used to justify it, (3) introduces word taboo …

Clear Depictions Promote Clear Decisions: Drafting Abortion Speech-And-Display Statutes That Pass First And Fourteenth Amendment Muster, Ryan J. Pulkrabek

Ryan J Pulkrabek

Several states have passed legislation requiring physicians to take, display, and describe an ultrasound to their patients who are seeking an abortion. These statutes have been challenged under both the Fourteenth and First Amendments because the statutes place burdens on women who seek abortion and compel physician speech. Courts are divided on these questions and state legislatures need guidance as they consider reform. This Article proposes a model "speech-and-display" statute that is both consistent with the Constitution and good public policy. This model statute is designed to protect the mental health of patients and the life of the unborn by …

Speaking Freely On Public Issues: Criminal Suspects As Involuntary Limited-Purpose Public Figures, Daniel T. Pesciotta

Daniel T Pesciotta

This paper discusses an important First Amendment issue that has received virtually no attention from the United States Supreme Court: the question of involuntary public figures in defamation cases. Determining an individual’s public figure status is often the dispositive question in defamation litigation as private figures need typically only prove the defendant spoke negligently, whereas public figures must satisfy the much higher actual malice standard first articulated in New York Times v. Sullivan. In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., the Court suggested that it is indeed possible for an individual to become a public figure involuntarily. Despite this …

The Naked Private Square, Ronald J. Colombo

Ronald J Colombo

In the latter half of the twentieth century, America witnessed the construction of a “wall of separation” between religion and the public square. What had once been commonplace (such as prayer in public schools, and religious symbols on public property) had suddenly become verboten. This phenomenon is well known and has been well studied.

Less well known (and less well studied) has been the parallel phenomenon of religion’s expulsion from the private square. Employment law, corporate law, and constitutional law have worked to impede the ability of business enterprises to adopt, pursue, and maintain distinctively religious personae. This is undesirable …

The System Of Modern Criminal Conspiracy, Steven R. Morrison

Steven R Morrison

Something has changed in the modern system of American criminal conspiracy law compared to its prior iterations. This article explores that change, arguing that the system of modern criminal conspiracy now gives to the government such great discretion to charge and prove a conspiracy that unpopular ideas and the speech that expresses them have become ready subjects of prosecution. At its center, this article defines the system of modern conspiracy law, which is one of uniformity rather than dynamism. Where dynamic systems of law contain distinct components that perform different tasks (proving actus reus and mens rea, for example), the …

Savagery In The Subways: The First Amendment, Anti-Muslim Ads And The Efficacy Of Counterspeech, Engy Abdelkader

Engy Abdelkader

From San Francisco to Washington, D.C. to Detroit to Chicago to New York, anti-Muslim hate placards have recently appeared on government-owned transit systems in cities around the country. Anti-Muslim hate groups designed, funded and placed the inflammatory advertisements, representing a well-orchestrated campaign to demean and attack the minority Muslim community. The ads have culminated in hate crime charges in the subway pushing death of an immigrant of South Asian descent, diverse manifestations of counter official and private speech and First Amendment litigation in at least three jurisdictions where well-meaning transit officials attempted to prevent the ads’ placement. Interdisciplinary in its …

Immoral Waiver: Judicial Review Of Intra-Military Sexual Assault Claims, Francine Banner

Francine Banner

This essay critiques the application of the Feres doctrine and the policy of judicial deference to military affairs in the context of recent class actions against government and military officials for constitutional violations stemming from sexual assaults in the U.S. military. The Pentagon estimates that 19,000 military sexual assaults occur each year. Yet, in 2011, fewer than two hundred persons were convicted of crimes of sexual violence. In the face of such pervasive and longstanding constitutional violations, this essay argues that the balance of harms weighs heavily in favor of judicial intervention. The piece discusses why, from both legal and …