Law Commons^™

In The Name Of Diversity: Why Mandatory Diversity Statements Violate The First Amendment And Reduce Intellectual Diversity In Academia, Daniel M. Ortner

Catholic University Law Review

In the 1950s and 1960s in many parts of the country, a professor could be fired or never hired if he refused to denounce communism or declare loyalty to the United States Constitution. The University of California system took the lead in enforcing these loyalty oaths. These loyalty oaths were challenged all the way up to the United States Supreme Court and were soundly rejected, establishing the centrality of academic freedom and open inquiry on the university campus. So why are loyalty oaths making their resurgence in the form of mandatory diversity statements? Universities have begun requiring faculty members to …

Trouble With Names: Commercial Speech And A New Approach To Food Product Label Regulation, William Cusack

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The Supreme Court has recognized First Amendment protection for “commercial speech” since 1975. Commercial speech doctrine seeks to balance advertiser interest in speech, consumer interest in information, and society’s interest that “economic decisions in the aggregate be intelligent and well-informed.” Regulations and compulsory disclosures of commercial speech play a part in ensuring consumers are well-informed. Yet, there continues to be consumer confusion surrounding the commercial speech doctrine’s application to food labeling. Lawmakers continue to pass regulations that are unnecessary or nonsensical. Regulators continue to enforce these regulations, even if the state interest in doing so is minimal or non-existent. There …

Revitalizing The Ban On Conversion Therapy: An Affirmation Of The Constitutionality Of Conversion Therapy Bans, Logan Kline

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Obergefell, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Fulton, And Public-Private Partnerships: Unleashing V. Harnessing 'Armies Of Compassion' 2.0?, Linda C. Mcclain

Faculty Scholarship

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia presented a by-now familiar constitutional claim: recognizing civil marriage equality—the right of persons to marry regardless of gender—inevitably and sharply conflicts with the religious liberty of persons and religious institutions who sincerely believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. While the Supreme Court’s 9-0 unanimous judgment in favor of Catholic Social Services (CSS) surprised Court-watchers, Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion did not signal consensus on the Court over how best to resolve the evident conflicts raised by the contract between CSS and the City of Philadelphia. This article argues that it …

Muzzling Anti-Vaxxer Fear Speech: Overcoming Free Speech Obstacles With Compelled Speech, Barbara Pfeffer Billauer

University of Miami Law Review

As the anti-vax industry continues to stoke fear and incite vaccine resistance, some means must be found to detoxify their false messages. Counterspeech, the preferred mode to deal with unfortunate rhetoric, is both ineffective and counter-effective when addressing factual “scientific speech” addressing health, I show here that many instances of the most potent anti-vax speech arise in the context of arguably commercial speech. I therefore investigate other free speech protections available to shield factually false anti-vax speech used in this context, concluding that while complete First Amendment protection may exist in the context of political speech (without proof of fraud), …

The Supreme Court And The Pro-Business Paradox, Elizabeth Pollman

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

One of the most notable trends of the Roberts Court is expanding corporate rights and narrowing liability or access to justice against corporate defendants. This Comment examines recent Supreme Court cases to highlight this “pro-business” pattern as well as its contradictory relationship with counter trends in corporate law and governance. From Citizens United to Americans for Prosperity, the Roberts Court’s jurisprudence could ironically lead to a situation in which it has protected corporate political spending based on a view of the corporation as an “association of citizens,” but allows constitutional scrutiny to block actual participants from getting information about …

The Thirteenth Amendment And One Hundred And Fifty Years Of Struggle To Criminalize Slavery: A First Amendment Challenge To The Forced Labor Act (18 U.S.C. § 1589), Niles Stefan Illich

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Justifying The Supreme Court’S Standards Of Review, R. Randall Kelso

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Absolute Publishing Power And Bulletproof Immunity: How Section 230 Shields Internet Service Providers From Liability And Makes It Impossible To Protect Your Reputation Online, Victoria Anderson

Seattle University Law Review SUpra

No abstract provided.

Taking Exception To Assessments Of American Exceptionalism: Why The United States Isn’T Such An Outlier On Free Speech, Evelyn Mary Aswad

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

One of the most significant challenges to human freedom in the digital age involves the sheer power of private companies over speech and the fact that power is untethered to existing free speech principles. Heated debates are ongoing about what standards social media companies should adopt to regulate speech on their platforms. Some have argued that global social media companies, such as Facebook and Twitter, should align their speech codes with the international human rights law standards of the United Nations (“U.N.”). Others have countered that U.S.-based companies should apply First Amendment standards. Much of this debate is premised on …

(Anti)-Slapp Happy In Federal Court?: The Applicability Of State Anti-Slapp Statutes In Federal Court And The Need For Federal Protection Against Slapps, Caitlin Daday

Catholic University Law Review

In recent years, lawsuits known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, or SLAPPs, have become increasingly common. These suits seek to intimidate and punish people for exercising their First Amendment rights. In response to SLAPPs, over half of the states have enacted anti-SLAPP statutes to protect the targets of SLAPPs. They do so by providing a mechanism for the target to dismiss the lawsuit more quickly than they would normally be able to. In federal courts, the question has arisen as to whether anti-SLAPP statutes should be applied in diversity suits given their close alignment to Federal Rules 8, 12, …

Does The Ministerial Exception Protect A Minister's Humiliating Comments?, Yiting Feng

SLU Law Journal Online

The Seventh Circuit case of Demkovich v. St. Andrew the Apostle Parish applied the ministerial exception to bar a fired minister’s claim of a hostile work environment. In this article, Yiting Feng lists the reason why she disagrees with the majority opinion and leans towards the dissenting opinion.

Virginia Court Reinstates Teacher Suspended For Opposing Trans Inclusion Policy, Arthur S. Leonard

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

When Two Rights Make A Wrong: Armed Assembly Under The First And Second Amendments, Michael C. Dorf

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

A “License To Kale”—Free Speech Challenges To Occupational Licensing Of Nutrition And Dietetics, Taylor J. Newman, Angela E. Surrett

St. Mary's Law Journal

State licensing of medical professions has occurred for over a century. Recently, these licensure statutes have been subject to First Amendment challenges, alleging occupational licensure impermissibly restricts freedom of speech. This Comment addresses these free speech challenges, arguing occupational licensure statutes, at least for medical professions, only incidentally impacts free speech—if at all—by permissibly regulating medical professional conduct necessarily requiring speech. Within, the authors ultimately describe, demonstrate, and recommend a legal framework, the other factor/personal nexus approach. This approach helps determine the point at which speech becomes regulable professional conduct subject to licensing, utilizing the nutrition and dietetics profession, and …

Penises, Nipples, And Bums, Oh My!: An Examination Of How Freedom Of Expression Applies To Public Nudity, Clara Gutwein

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

How do you solve a problem like the nipple? A woman's nipples are both erotic and utilitarian, obscene and maternal. She must never show them in public. She must show them to feed her child. Nipples are for men. Nipples are for babies. Nipples, it seems, are for everyone except a woman herself. The law, too, has something to say about nipples. It is completely constitutional for the government to prevent women from publicly showing their nipples in order to protect morality and public order. Thus, the law assumes an inversely proportional relationship between the number of publicly exposed nipples …

Judges As Superheroes: The Danger Of Confusing Constitutional Decisions With Cosmic Battles, H. Jefferson Powell

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Thought In The United States: The First Amendment, Marketplaces Of Ideas, And The Internet, John G. Francis, Leslie Francis

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Freedom of thought is not directly protected as a right in the United States. Instead, US First Amendment law protects a range of rights that may allow thoughts to be expressed. Freedom of speech has been granted especially robust protection. US courts have extended this protection to a wide range of commercial activities judged to have expressive content. In protecting these rights, US jurisprudence frequently relies on the image of the marketplace of ideas as furthering the search for truth. This commercial image, however, has increasingly detached expressive rights from the understanding of freedom of thought as a critical forum …

Changing Counterspeech, G.S. Hans

Cleveland State Law Review

A cornerstone of First Amendment doctrine is that counterspeech — speech that responds to speech, including disfavored, unpopular, or offensive speech — is preferable to government censorship or speech regulation. The counterspeech doctrine is often invoked to justify overturning or limiting legislation, regulation, or other government action. Counterspeech forms part of the rationale for the "marketplace of ideas" that the First Amendment is arguably designed to promote. Yet critics assert that counterspeech is hardly an effective remedy for the harms caused by "hate speech" and other offensive words that are expressed in American society, given the realities of how speech …

For Facebook’S Sake: Getting Conversant With Human Rights, Deborah Pearlstein

Online Publications

Each time I read a new article or interview with an American lawyer or legal scholar reacting to the recent decision by the Facebook Oversight Board (FOB) to invoke international human rights law in sustaining Facebook’s suspension of Donald Trump – I feel seized by the impulse to respond with an unsolicited public primer on what international human rights law (IHRL) is. It is not an unfamiliar feeling. On the contrary, the impulse (which I experience as uncomfortably paternalistic) has emerged repeatedly in the past, say, 20 years, during any one of countless exchanges with lawyers or academics who have …

The Doomed Constitutional Case Against Exclusive Representation, Michael M. Oswalt

College of Law Faculty Publications

When the Supreme Court decided Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) in 2018, the decision not only made it unconstitutional for public sector unions to require “fair share fees” for negotiating contracts and defending workers, it also set off a litigation landslide. Literally hundreds of cases have waded through the courts urging various theoretical extensions of Janus that—boiled down—seek to starve unions and their members of even more funding

How Far Will Fara Go? The Foreign Agents Registration Act And The Criminalization Of Global Human Rights Advocacy, Monica Romero

Washington Law Review

The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was enacted and enforced during World War II to protect the American public from foreign propaganda, especially from the Nazi party. Following the war, FARA was scarcely used for over half a century. But in the past five years, there has been a significant uptick in FARA enforcement, particularly against major political personalities. The revival of FARA has led many legislators and scholars to advocate for expansions of FARA’s scope and enforcement mechanisms in the name of national security. But most have failed to acknowledge the risk and likelihood of politicized enforcement. The United …

United States Food Law Update: Shrouded By Election-Year Politics, State Initiatives And Private Lawsuits Fill In The Gaps Created By Congressional And Agency Ossification, A. Bryan Endres, Lisa R. Schlessinger, Rachel Armstrong

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Observers of food law in the 2012 presidential election year witnessed a dramatic slowing of federal initiatives-perhaps arising from a desire by both Congress and the administration to avoid upsetting critical constituent groups during a year seemingly dominated by campaigns and endless talking points. For example, Congress failed to take action on a unique compromise between what some had considered mortal enemies-the Humane Society of the United States and United Egg Producers-that would implement a federal animal welfare standard for laying hens in return for abandoning ballot measures in various states. Similarly, the FDA waited until the early days of …

First Amendment Knowledge And Competence In United States Residents, Cynthia J. Najdowski, Kimberly M. Bernstein

Psychology Faculty Scholarship

Lacking adequate knowledge about one's rights could inhibit the likelihood of exercising one's rights or lead one to unwittingly violate laws that place legitimate limits on these rights. Thus, the present research examines First Amendment knowledge as well as competence to apply this knowledge in relevant circumstances. Results revealed that one-quarter of participants failed a test of objective knowledge on First Amendment rights. Furthermore, participants' belief in their ability varied depending on their level of knowledge, in line with the Dunning–Kruger effect. Participants also failed to transfer their limited objective knowledge to “real-world” situations, exhibiting impaired First Amendment competence. These …

Child Entertainers And Their Limited Protections: A Call For An Interstate Compact, Tabetha Bennett

Child and Family Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Free Speech In The Internet Era: Reviewing Policies Seeking To Modify Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act Of 1996, Jacob Cordeiro

Senior Honors Projects

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), has for over two decades provided “interactive computer services” a legal liability shield for defamatory or otherwise actionable user-generated content posted on their platforms and, for lawsuits stemming over unequal enforcement of their content policies provided enforcement efforts are taken in “good faith.” This law, passed in the early days of the Internet, incubated the Internet and social media, giving it the regulatory freedom it needed to grow into a platform where hundreds of millions of Americans can exchange ideas and engage in political and social discourse. Yet, for all the good …

Campus Free Speech In The Mirror Of Rising Anti-Semitism, Harry G. Hutchison

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

Why Liberalism Persists: The Neglected Life Of The Law In The Story Of Liberalism's Decline, Kenneth L. Townsend

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Liberalism is in decline in the West. Past political divides that pitted classically liberal conservatives against moderate to progressive political liberals are giving way to a new landscape in which a liberal consensus simply cannot be assumed. From the left, socialist and identity-based critiques of liberalism have called into question core liberal assumptions regarding procedural justice, the division between public and private realms, and the rights of individuals. From the right, an increasingly vocal group of conservatives is questioning classical liberalism’s commitment to limited government, a free market, and individual rights in favor of a vision of political community …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Professors Elizabeth A. Clark, Robert F. Cochran, Jr., Carl H. Esbeck, David F. Forte, Richard W. Garnett, Christopher C. Lund, Michael W. Mcconnell, Michael P. Moreland, Robert J. Pushaw, And David A., Skeel, Supporting Petitioners, David Forte, Elizabeth A. Clark, Robert F. Cochran Jr., Carl H. Esbeck, Richard W. Garnett, Christopher C. Lund, Michael W. Mcconnell, Michael P. Moreland, Robert J. Pushaw, David A. Skeel

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

The case concerns the "church autonomy doctrine" based on the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, which declares that courts may not inquire into matters of church government or into disputes of faith and doctrine. Will McRaney was fired from a leadership position in the Southern Baptist Convention because of a conflict over policies relating to the expansion of the Baptist faith. He sued the Southern Baptist Convention in tort.

The district court dismissed the suit on the grounds of the church autonomy doctrine. The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal as "premature," asserting that there were possible …

Special Solicitude: Religious Freedom At America’S Public Universities, William E. Thro

Office of Legal Counsel Academic Publications

Rejecting the Obama Administration’s argument that the First Amendment requires identical treatment for religious organizations and secular organizations, the Supreme Court held such a “result is hard to square with the text of the First Amendment itself, which gives special solicitude to the rights of religious organizations.” (Hosanna-Tabor, 565 U.S. at 189). This “special solicitude” guarantees religious freedom from the government in all aspects of society, but particularly on public university campuses. At a minimum, religious expression and religious organizations must have equal rights with secular expression and secular organizations. In some instances, religious expression and religious expression …