Law Commons^™

A Cacophony Of Speech, Law, And Persona: Battling Against The Vortex Of #Metoo In France And The U.S., Anne Wagner, Sarah Marusek

Journal of Civil Law Studies

The pervasive proliferation of rumors, through #MeToo and #BalanceTonPorc, communicates meaningful and meaningless-making processes on misconducts both in the French and U.S. con-texts. Such rumors have transformed the online practices by culti-vating both verbal and non-verbal hate speech free and/or free speech. This cacophony of speech, law, and persona has led to a debate relayed on social media platforms, exposing people to a dan-ger zone mostly based as shame, hate, fear, or even destruction, as anonymity and due process no longer prevail.

􏰀Enough􏰁S Enough􏰂: Protest Law And The Tradition Of Chilling Indigenous Free Speech, Alix H. Bruce

American Indian Law Journal

Indigenous peoples in the United States were not granted the full scope of their rights as citizens under the Constitution until the enactment of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. Before that—and after—several state and federal campaigns worked to stifle the civil rights of Indigenous peoples. Many of those unjust and unconstitutional policies were upheld by the Supreme Court. In the current era, the anti-pipeline protests on the edge of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota sparked a new recognition of Indigenous resistance under the First Amendment—and vicious state and federal backlash against Indigenous free speech via the …

The Case Against Expanding Defamation Law, Yonathan A. Arbel, Murat C. Mungan

Faculty Scholarship

It is considered axiomatic that defamation law protects reputation. This proposition—commonsensical, pervasive, and influential—is faulty. Underlying this fallacy is the failure to appreciate audience effects: the interaction between defamation law and members of the audience.

Defamation law seeks to affect the behavior of speakers by making them bear a cost for spreading untruthful information. Invariably, however, the law will also affect members of the audience, as statements made in a highly regulated environment tend to appear more reliable than statements made without accountability. Strict defamation law would tend to increase the perceived reliability of statements, which in some cases can …

The Defamation Injunction Meets The Prior Restraint Doctrine, Doug Rendleman

San Diego Law Review

This article maintains that, under defined circumstances, a judge should be able to grant an injunction that forbids the defendant’s proved defamation. It analyzes the common law of defamation, the constitutional prior restraint doctrine, the constitutional protection for defamation that stems from New York Times v. Sullivan, and injunctions and their enforcement.

In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court expanded protection for expression by adding an injunction to executive licensing as a prior restraint. Although the Near court circumscribed the injunction as a prior restraint, it approved criminal sanctions and damages judgment for defamation. An injunction that forbids the defendant’s …

Deep Fakes: Preserving Truth & Human Rights In An Era Of Truth Decay, Virginia Kozemczak

Biennial Conference: The Social Practice of Human Rights

Lawmakers, technology companies, and the general public are increasingly concerned about the prevalence of “deep fake” videos. Often shared on social media platforms, these digitally altered videos are made possible with recent advances in machine learning and artificial intelligence.

Although altered and faked media content is not necessarily a new issue, images and videos can now be altered quickly, cheaply, and more convincingly than ever before. An underlying concern is that platforms will be overwhelmed with believable deep fakes, leaving Internet users struggling to discern fact from fiction. Yet a future in which no one call tell what is real …

Assumptions About Terrorism And The Brandenburg Incitement Test, Christina E. Wells

Faculty Publications

The incitement standard announced in Brandenburg v. Ohio is one of the most familiar tests in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence. It prohibits government officials from punishing advocacy of illegal activity unless it is directed and likely to imminently incite such activity. Brandenburg's standard has become a pillar of free speech law, allowing government officials to protect public safety by punishing only speech intended and likely to create an imminent danger of harm, while protecting even the most abhorrent of speakers from suppression of their speech simply because government officials fear or dislike it. Terrorist advocacy, however, is putting pressure on …

This Isn't Lochner, It's The First Amendment: Reorienting The Right To Contract And Commercial Speech, William French

Northwestern University Law Review

The commercial speech doctrine has long weathered accusations that it is simply an attempt to reinvigorate the laissez-faire protections provided by Lochner v. New York. The modern interpretation of Lochner is generally condemnatory, arguing that its “right to contract” is a symbol of the Supreme Court’s unprincipled decision to impose its own economic preferences upon the nation. Even though Lochnerism itself has been dead for nearly 100 years, some scholars believe that the First Amendment’s commercial speech doctrine is on its way to replicating the defenses provided by the right to contract. The argument goes that because speech pervades …

Sex, Lies, And Videotape: Deep Fakes And Free Speech Delusions, Mary Anne Franks, Ari Ezra Waldman

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Masterclass In Trademark's Descriptive Fair Use Defense, Deborah R. Gerhardt

Akron Law Review

When judges decide trademark cases, they often must balance trademark rights against interests in free expression. The defense known as “classic” or “descriptive” fair use embraces the foundational themes that make trademark conflicts so compelling. By design, the defense pits fair competition and free speech against a mark owner’s right to control its story, reputation, and values. The outcome of this tug of war may be hard to predict. It turns on consumer perception, and therefore, generally raises questions of fact. But in Mars, Inc. v. J.M. Smucker Co., this fact intensive question was decided as a matter of law. …

Trademarks & The First Amendment After Matal V. Tam, Gary Myers

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

The United States Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Matal v. Tam is a landmark decision regarding the intersection between free speech and trademark law. Addressing whether trademarks can legitimately be barred from federal trademark protection under the Lanham Act based solely on their possible disparaging content, the litigation involving an Asian-American band that sought to register the name, "The Slants," brought this important interplay into stark relief. Writing in bold strokes, Justice Alito's opinion holds that the Lanham Act's prohibition on disparaging marks, 15 U.S.C. 51052(a), violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. "It offends a bedrock First …

Brief Amici Curiae Of Electronic Frontier Foundation, 1851 Center For Constitutional Law, And Profs. Jonathan Entin, David F. Forte, Andrew Geronimo, Raymond Ku, Stephen Lazarus, Kevin Francis O’Neill, Margaret Tarkington, Aaron H. Caplan, And Eugene Volokh In Support Of Respondent-Appellant, Joni Bey And Rebecca Rasawehr V. Jeffrey Rasawehr, Supreme Court Of Ohio (Case No. 2019-0295), David Forte, Stephen R. Lazarus, Kevin F. O'Neill, Jonathan L. Entin, Andrew Geronimo, Raymond Ku, Margaret Tarkington, Aaron H. Kaplan, Eugene Volokh

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

The brief argues that the Third District Court of Appeals, in violation of the First Amendment, erred in upholding an injunction that barred defendant from any online postings regarding plaintiff, whether or not those postings were to plaintiff or to third parties.

Remedies, Neutral Rules And Free Speech, David F. Partlett, Russell L. Weaver

Russell L. Weaver

In general, plaintiffs’ ability to obtain substantial damages against media defendants is directly proportional to their ability to obtain so called “publication damages.”...In future cases, the courts may be forced to deal more straightforwardly with the First Amendment issues. In Sanders, the court avoided those issues because they were not raised. As a result, the court left open the possibility that, even in an intrusion case a media defendant might be allowed to show that the invasion of privacy was “justified by the legitimate motive of gathering the news.”...Moreover, the very existence of the litigation undoubtedly has a negative impact …

Free Speech On Public College Campuses, Christopher Gothard

Senior Honors Projects, 2010-2019

The topic of free speech has become increasingly publicized and debated recently. With cases of speech being suppressed coming to light all across the country, it is apparent that there has been a tremendous shift in views on college campuses on the right to free speech. Through trying to balance an inclusive society with the right of all to speak freely, the First Amendment right to free speech and the applicable case law have begun to be inconsistently interpreted, specifically on public college campuses. Whether by imposing security costs on speakers, solely utilizing free speech zones, or allowing the heckler’s …

Lactose’S Intolerance: The Role Of Manufacturers’ Rights And Commercial Free Speech In Big Dairy’S Fight To Restrict Use Of The Term “Milk”, Kathleen Justis

Brooklyn Law Review

This note examines the relationship between restrictions on commercial speech and manufacturers’ First Amendment right to describe their products to consumers, with a focus on the DAIRY PRIDE Act. It argues that broad, content-based restrictions of commercial speech, like that proposed in the DAIRY PRIDE Act, likely impose unconstitutional limitations on manufacturers’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech. This note recommends that both Congress and the FDA should refrain from passing a statute or promulgating a regulation like the DAIRY PRIDE Act. Rather, it proposes that adding rules to control the proportions and location of disclaimers on product labels …

Clear As Mud: Constitutional Concerns With Clear Affirmative Consent, C. Ashley Saferight

Cleveland State Law Review

Rape and sexual assault laws and policies have shifted significantly in recent years, including the introduction of affirmative consent. Unfortunately, both proponents and critics tend to confuse the issues and falsely equate affirmative consent as a substantive social standard versus a procedural standard for adjudication and punishment. Although affirmative consent generally does not represent a significant change in consent law in the United States, statutes and policies requiring a further requirement that affirmative consent be clear and unambiguous (“clear affirmative consent”) are problematic and raise constitutional concerns. When clear affirmative consent policies are used as an adjudicative standard, they increase …

Regulating Sugar-Sweetened Beverages, Tyler Rauh

University of Miami Business Law Review

American waistlines are an international punchline, and United States taxpayers spend hundreds of billions of dollars each year to combat medical complications resulting from obesity. The personal costs are financial, emotional, and mortal. Projections insist that it will become worse. Section I details the obesity epidemic and ponders why the United States is uniquely unhealthy.

The reason could be that America consumes more sugar than any other country. In recent years, some municipal policymakers have attempted to restrain America’s sweet tooth by taxing sugar-sweetened beverages. Initial responses are polarizing. Chicago’s tax did not last three months before its abolishment. Philadelphia’s …

Platforms, The First Amendment And Online Speech: Regulating The Filters, Sofia Grafanaki

Pace Law Review

In recent years, online platforms have given rise to multiple discussions about what their role is, what their role should be, and whether they should be regulated. The complex nature of these private entities makes it very challenging to place them in a single descriptive category with existing rules. In today’s information environment, social media platforms have become a platform press by providing hosting as well as navigation and delivery of public expression, much of which is done through machine learning algorithms. This article argues that there is a subset of algorithms that social media platforms use to filter public …

Comrades Or Foes: Did The Russians Break The Law Or New Ground For The First Amendment?, Artem M. Joukov, Samantha M. Caspar

Pace Law Review

This Article discusses the recent decision by the United States Federal Government to indict more than a dozen Russian nationals for conspiracy to defraud the United States of America. The Government accused the Russians of staging protests, distributing false propaganda, and spreading political messages and ideologies online in an effort to affect the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. We argue that while the Defendants violated several other laws, the majority of the acts the Government classifies as a conspiracy to defraud the United States should not be considered criminal. Rather, these acts are protected political speech under the First …

The Invention Of First Amendment Federalism, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

When insisting that the Sedition Act of 1798 violated the First Amendment, Jeffersonian Republicans cast their argument in historical terms, claiming that the Speech and Press Clauses eliminated any federal power to restrict expression. Scholars, in turn, have generally accepted that Republicans had a consistent understanding of the First Amendment throughout the 1790s. But Founding Era constitutionalism was dynamic in practice, even while often conservative in rhetoric, and scholars have missed the striking novelty of the principal argument against the Sedition Act. Republicans had taken a rights provision and transformed it into a federalism rule.

Mostly ignored in the literature, …

Reds Among The Cream And Crimson, Kelly Kish

Historic Documents

What happened when three IU law professors were accused of harboring Communist sympathies in 1946.

Originally published in the publication 200 The Bicentennial Magazine, Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2019.

A Close Reading Of Barnette, In Honor Of Vincent Blasi, Paul Horwitz

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Defamation Injunction Meets The Prior Restraint Doctrine, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court added the injunction to executive licensing as a prior restraint. Although the Near court circumscribed the injunction as a prior restraint, it approved criminal sanctions and damages judgments. The prior restraint label resembles a death sentence. This article maintains that such massive retaliation is overkill.

A judge’s injunction that forbids the defendant’s tort of defamation tests Near and prior restraint doctrine because defamation isn’t protected by the First Amendment. Arguing that the anti-defamation injunction has outgrown outright bans under the prior restraint rule and the equitable Maxim that “Equity will not enjoin defamation” …

Facebook V. Sullivan: Public Figures And Newsworthiness In Online Speech, Thomas E. Kadri, Kate Klonick

Scholarly Works

In the United States, there are now two systems to adjudicate disputes about harmful speech. The first is older and more established: the legal system in which judges apply constitutional law to limit tort claims alleging injuries caused by speech. The second is newer and less familiar: the content-moderation system in which platforms like Facebook implement the rules that govern online speech. These platforms are not bound by the First Amendment. But, as it turns out, they rely on many of the tools used by courts to resolve tensions between regulating harmful speech and preserving free expression—particularly the entangled concepts …

Powerful Speakers And Their Listeners, Helen Norton

Publications

In certain settings, law sometimes puts listeners first when their First Amendment interests collide with speakers’. And collide they often do. Sometimes speakers prefer to tell lies when their listeners thirst for the truth. Sometimes listeners hope that speakers will reveal their secrets, while those speakers resist disclosure. And at still other times, speakers seek to address certain listeners when those listeners long to be left alone. When speakers’ and listeners’ First Amendment interests collide, whose interests should prevail? Law sometimes – but not always – puts listeners’ interests first in settings outside of public discourse where those listeners have …

Compelled Subsidies And Original Meaning, Jud Campbell

Law Faculty Publications

The rule against compelled subsidization of speech is at the forefront of modem First Amendment disputes. Challenges to mandatory union dues, laws preventing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and the federal "contraceptive mandate" have all featured variants of the anti-subsidization principle, reasoning that the government cannot compel people to support the objectionable activities of others. But the literature currently fails to evaluate modem compelled-subsidy doctrine in terms of the original meaning of the First Amendment. This Essay takes up that task.

Approaching any question of original meaning requires a willingness to encounter a constitutional world that looks very …

Deconstitutionalizing Dewey, Aaron J. Saiger

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

On Blasphemy: Immigrant Muslim Leaders In America, Angela Ewing

Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies

Some Muslim immigrants in the United States have difficulty reconciling American free speech rights with the blasphemy component of Islamic law, which often requires death for those who criticize Islam. Little academic literature addresses reconciliation of Islamic beliefs with the Constitutional right to free speech or information on Muslim political participation regarding free speech. Using policy feedback theory as the foundation, the purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand the experiences of Muslim immigrants who practice Islam in a free speech society. Data were collected from a sample of 10 immigrant Muslim imams, scholars, and community leaders in Virginia …

Drawing Trump Naked: Curbing The Right Of Publicity To Protect Public Discourse, Thomas E. Kadri

Scholarly Works

From Donald Trump to Lindsay Lohan to Manuel Noriega, real people who are portrayed in expressive works are increasingly targeting creators of those works for allegedly violating their “right of publicity”—a state-law tort, grounded in privacy concerns, that prohibits the unauthorized use of a person’s name, likeness, and other identifying characteristics. This Article provides a new framework to reconcile publicity rights with a robust commitment to free speech under the First Amendment. After describing the current landscape in the courts, this Article scrutinizes the “educative” First Amendment theory that has motivated many of the past decisions confronting the right of …

Aba Model Rule 8.4(G) In The States, Josh Blackman

Catholic University Law Review

This essay will provide a brief overview of how the states have responded to

ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). Part I reviews opinions from four state attorneys

general who concluded that the rule is unconstitutional: Texas, South Carolina,

Louisiana, and Tennessee. Part II discusses the states that considered the rule

with modifications. Part III reviews the states that considered Rule 8.4(g) as

drafted. So far, only one state adopted the rule: Vermont. However, the process

is still not over, and other states are currently considering the rule.

Data Subjects' Privacy Rights: Regulation Of Personal Data Retention And Erasure, Alexander Tsesis...

University of Colorado Law Review

No abstract provided.