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

Law Commons

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

First Amendment

2015

The University of Akron

Supreme Court of the United States

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Of Flags And Menorahs: The Power Of Individual And Governmental Symbolic Speech, Mark F. Kohler Jul 2015

Of Flags And Menorahs: The Power Of Individual And Governmental Symbolic Speech, Mark F. Kohler

Akron Law Review

The aim of this article will be to explore the nature of symbolic speech, both individual and governmental. Using Johnson and Allegheny County as a backdrop, four themes will emerge from the article. First, both individuals and government speak and speak powerfully through symbols and symbolic conduct. Second, medium-based regulation of individual speech should receive careful judicial scrutiny. Third, unlike individual symbolic expression, governmental symbolic speech is subject to substantial content-based restrictions. Finally, careful distinctions must be drawn between government-initiated symbolic speech and governmental endorsement of individual symbolic speech.


Newdow Calls For A New Day In Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides The Necessary Renovation, James A. Campbell Jul 2015

Newdow Calls For A New Day In Establishment Clause Jurisprudence: Justice Thomas's "Actual Legal Coercion" Standard Provides The Necessary Renovation, James A. Campbell

Akron Law Review

This Comment examines the concurring opinions of Justice O’Connor and Justice Thomas in Newdow and explores whether either approach is able to solve the problems inherent in the Court’s current analysis. Section II discusses the meaning of the Establishment Clause and explores its historical background. Section III outlines current Establishment Clause analysis and its inherent hostility toward religion. Section IV introduces O’Connor’s ceremonial deism approach and Thomas’s “actual legal coercion” test, as outlined in Newdow. Section V discusses the inability of O’Connor’s approach to solve the inherent deficiencies in the Court’s current analysis, whereas, Section VI argues that Thomas’s actual …


From Armbands To Douchbags: How Doninger V. Niehoff Shows The Supreme Court Needs To Address Student Speech In The Cyber Age, Allison E. Hayes Jun 2015

From Armbands To Douchbags: How Doninger V. Niehoff Shows The Supreme Court Needs To Address Student Speech In The Cyber Age, Allison E. Hayes

Akron Law Review

Part II of this Note discusses the background of First Amendment student speech cases as decided by the Supreme Court as well as a unique classification of lower court holdings. Part III focuses on Doninger v. Niehoff in detail, including the underlying facts, competing arguments, procedural history, and the District of Connecticut’s and Second Circuit’s rationale. Part IV analyzes why this case was wrongly decided and argues that the Supreme Court needs to offer more guidance to lower courts so they may apply a more consistent standard in student speech cases. Further, it suggests a framework courts should adopt in …


The Unconstitutionality Of Ohio's House Bill 125: The Heartbeat Bill, Jessica L. Knopp Jun 2015

The Unconstitutionality Of Ohio's House Bill 125: The Heartbeat Bill, Jessica L. Knopp

Akron Law Review

This Comment analyzes the constitutionality of Ohio’s controversial H.B. 125 under the Fourteenth and First Amendments to the United States Constitution in the context of current United States Supreme Court precedent. Part II outlines Ohio’s current abortion laws, describes Ohio’s role in creating anti-abortion legislation and case law, provides a context of other abortion bills occurring nationwide, and explains H.B. 125. Part III analyzes how H.B. 125 is unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment in its current form, analyzes its constitutionality if the bill was modified to be a consent-only bill, and analyzes its unconstitutionality under the Establishment Clause of the …


Recognizing An Academic Freedom Exception To The Garcetti Limitation On The First Amendment Right To Free Speech, Carol N. Tran Jun 2015

Recognizing An Academic Freedom Exception To The Garcetti Limitation On The First Amendment Right To Free Speech, Carol N. Tran

Akron Law Review

In order to uphold the integrity of the First Amendment, it is essential that the Supreme Court establish a clear academic freedom exception to First Amendment jurisprudence. This Comment proposes that an academic freedom exception should exist based upon the history of academic freedom. The Comment will also discuss the limits and bounds for such an exception. Part II will begin by looking at the history of First Amendment law surrounding free speech in the workplace. Part III will then examine different circuit approaches to the Garcetti limitation to the First Amendment right to freedom of speech in the academic …