Law Commons^™

The Fossil Fuel Industry’S Push To Target Climate Protesters In The U.S., Grace Nosek

Pace Environmental Law Review

At the very moment when the United Nations has called for profound shifts in social and economic systems to avert climate catastrophe, state and non-state actors in the United States (U.S.) are using a series of tactics to target and stifle climate protesters. Although the move to stifle climate protesters is often framed as a government effort, this Article argues it is critical to draw out the role of the fossil fuel industry in initiating, amplifying, and supporting such tactics.

This Article highlights the role the fossil fuel industry has played in supporting the targeting and restricting of climate protesters …

Telltale Marks: Looking Beyond Censorship Of Guantánamo, Aliana E. Sheers

Binghamton University Undergraduate Journal

In the United States, the government holds a storytelling monopoly; the stories it tells of Guantánamo dictate its reality, regardless of whether or not those stories are true. I will examine the government’s public statements about Guantánamo, then contrast these with covert communications and actions taken. Additionally, I will analyze iconic American images painted by detainees in classes at Guantánamo to garner the detainee perspective on the prison and the U.S. Acceptance of a single story is the antithesis of democracy; only when we strive to uncover the whole truth can we claim we have freedom of speech.

Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First Amendment …

Racial Justice Protests & Protestor Rights (July 15, 2020), Timothy Zick, Mikaela Phillips

Racial Justice & Social Reform Speaker Series

No abstract provided.

Speak Up, Or Not: Lack Of Freedom Of Speech Protection In Vietnam, Its Global Impact, And Proposed Solutions For Adequate Remedies, H. Grant Doan

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A More Perfect Pickering Test: Janus V. Afscme Council 31 And The Problem Of Public Employee Speech, Alexandra J. Gilewicz

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In June 2018, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited—and, for the American labor movement, long-feared—decision in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31. The decision is expected to have a major impact on public sector employee union membership, but could have further impact on public employees’ speech rights in the workplace. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito’s broad interpretation of whether work-related speech constitutes a “matter of public concern” may have opened the floodgates to substantially more litigation by employees asserting that their employers have violated their First Amendment rights. Claims that would have previously been unequivocally foreclosed may now …

Masterpiece's Equal Treatment Of The Religious And Expressive Freedoms Under The First Amendment, Hwi Won Kim

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

This thesis aims at examining the validity of free speech claims for religious exemptions on the one hand and reviewing the Masterpiece Court's holdings on the current complex entanglement of religious exemption theories, on the other hand; and finally, it also provides a possible suggestion for co-existing between two constitutional values without an all-or-nothing solution.

As to the free speech argument, the Court would likely decide that a compelled speech argument should succeed if, and only if, the vendor’s good or service is expressive under the Free Speech Clause. For a baker, the Court would protect making a custom cake …

Privileged Violence, Principled Fantasy, And Feminist Method: The Colby Fraternity Case, Martha T. Mccluskey

Maine Law Review

Colby College banned fraternities and sororities in 1984 after many years of unsuccessfully attempting to improve fraternity behavior. Sexual harassment and sex discrimination were major reasons for the college's decision. At first the college withheld official recognition of and financial benefits to the fraternities. Membership in fraternities was not punished, although Colby established a policy prohibiting any participation in fraternities. The college had hoped that without houses, financing, and other support from the administration, the fraternities would disband—particularly once all students who had belonged to the officially sanctioned groups had graduated. Although the sororities soon dissolved, most of the male …

A Democratic Political Economy For The First Amendment, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Review

In this Article, I begin building an interpretation of the First Amendment that promotes the practical conditions for a vital democracy. I argue that considerations of distributive justice do properly affect interpretation of free speech and religious liberty. This is true even assuming that those provisions have priority over ordinary law, including economic regulation.

Absolute Freedom Of Opinion And Sentiment On All Subjects: John Stuart Mill’S Enduring (And Ever-Growing) Influence On The Supreme Court’S First Amendment Free Speech Jurisprudence, Eric T. Kasper, Troy A. Kozma

University of Massachusetts Law Review

A majority of Justices on the contemporary U.S. Supreme Court have increasingly adopted a largely libertarian view of the constitutional right to the freedom of expression. Indeed, on issues ranging from campaign finance to offensive speech to symbolic speech to commercial speech to online expression, the Court has struck down many laws on free speech grounds. Much of the reasoning in these cases mirrors John Stuart Mill’s arguments in On Liberty. This is not new, as Mill’s position on free speech has been advocated by some members of the Court for a century. However, the advocacy of Mill’s position …

The Law Of Obscenity In Comic Books, Rachel Silverstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court’S Two Constitutions: A First Look At The “Reverse Polarity” Cases, Arthur D. Hellman

Articles

In the traditional approach to ideological classification, “liberal” judicial decisions are those that support civil liberties claims; “conservative” decisions are those that reject them. That view – particularly associated with the Warren Court era – is reflected in numerous academic writings and even an article by a prominent liberal judge. Today, however, there is mounting evidence that the traditional assumptions about the liberal-conservative divide are incorrect or at best incomplete. In at least some areas of constitutional law, the traditional characterizations have been reversed. Across a wide variety of constitutional issues, support for claims under the Bill of Rights or …

Merging The Social And The Public: How Social Media Platforms Could Be A New Public Forum, Amélie P. Heldt

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Valuing The Freedom Of Speech And The Freedom To Compete In Defenses To Trademark And Related Claims In The United States, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

This book chapter appears in the CAMBRIDGE HANDBOOK ON INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE TRADEMARK LAW, edited by Jane C. Ginsburg & Irene Calboli (Cambridge Univ. Press 2020). The Chapter provides an overview of the defenses to trademark infringement, dilution, and false endorsement claims that serve the goals of free expression and fair competition. In particular, the Chapter covers the defenses of genericism, functionality, descriptive and nominative fair use, the Rogers test, statutory exemptions to dilution claims, and the questions of whether and how an independent First Amendment defense applies in light of recent Supreme Court decisions.

In addition to providing a …

"The Road I Can't Help Travelling": Holmes On Truth And Persuadability, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Holmes's Understanding Of His Clear-And-Present-Danger Test: Why Exactly Did He Require Imminence?, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

For all the suggestiveness and staying power of his market-in-ideas metaphor, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s most significant influence on First Amendment law has turned out to be his notion that only imminent harm can justify punishment for expressions of opinion. This emphasis on the time dimension in the calculus of harm is now entrenched in modern doctrine. It is easy to imagine how First Amendment law might have developed differently had Holmes’s peculiar focus on imminence not been a factor in shaping how the freedom of speech has come to be understood in the United States.

Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First Amendment …