Constitutional Law Commons^™

The Role Of Internet Intermediaries In Tackling Terrorism Online, Raphael Cohen-Almagor

Fordham Law Review

Gatekeeping is defined as the work of third parties “who are able to disrupt misconduct by withholding their cooperation from wrongdoers.”1 Internet intermediaries need to be far more proactive as gatekeepers than they are now. Socially responsible measures can prevent the translation of violent thoughts into violent actions. Designated monitoring mechanisms can potentially prevent such unfortunate events. This Article suggests an approach that harnesses the strengths and capabilities of the public and private sectors in offering practical solutions to pressing problems. It proposes that internet intermediaries should fight stringently against terror and further argues that a responsible gatekeeping approach is …

Social Media Accountability For Terrorist Propaganda, Alexander Tsesis

Fordham Law Review

Terrorist organizations have found social media websites to be invaluable for disseminating ideology, recruiting terrorists, and planning operations. National and international leaders have repeatedly pointed out the dangers terrorists pose to ordinary people and state institutions. In the United States, the federal Communications Decency Act’s § 230 provides social networking websites with immunity against civil law suits. Litigants have therefore been unsuccessful in obtaining redress against internet companies who host or disseminate third-party terrorist content. This Article demonstrates that § 230 does not bar private parties from recovery if they can prove that a social media company had received complaints …

Free Speech And National Security Bootstraps, Heidi Kitrosser

Fordham Law Review

It is troubling that courts treat administrative designations—specifically, both FTO determinations and information classification—as bootstraps by which to yank speech restrictions from the clutches of probing judicial scrutiny. This Article builds on existing scholarly critiques to identify and examine the common thread of national security bootstrapping that runs through both sets of cases. The hope is that in so doing, some greater light may be shed both on the cases themselves and, more broadly, on the costs and benefits of judicial deference to executive national security claims where civil rights and civil liberties are at stake.

Government Speech And The War On Terror, Helen Norton

Fordham Law Review

This Article examines how the government’s speech in the War on Terror can threaten free speech, equal protection, and due process values. It focuses primarily on the constitutional harms threatened by the government’s speech itself (what some call a form of “soft law”), rather than on situations in which the government’s speech may be evidence of a constitutionally impermissible motive for its “hard law” actions.

Terrorizing Advocacy And The First Amendment: Free Expression And The Fallacy Of Mutual Exclusivity, Martin H. Redish, Matthew Fisher

Fordham Law Review

Traditional free speech doctrine is inadequate to account for modern terrorist speech. Unprotected threats and substantially protected lawful advocacy are not mutually exclusive. This Article proposes recognizing a new hybrid category of speech called “terrorizing advocacy.” This is a type of traditionally protected public advocacy of unlawful conduct that simultaneously exhibits the unprotected pathologies of a true threat. This Article explains why this new category confounds existing First Amendment doctrine and details a proposed model for how the doctrine should be reshaped.

Terrorist Incitement On The Internet, Alexander Tsesis

Fordham Law Review

I organized this symposium to advance understanding of how terrorist communications drive and influence social, political, religious, civil, literary, and artistic conduct. Viewing terrorist speech through wide prisms of law, culture, and contemporary media can provide lawmakers, adjudicators, and administrators a better understanding of how to contain and prevent the exploitation of modern communication technologies to influence, recruit, and exploit others to perpetrate ideologically driven acts of violence. Undertaking such a multipronged study requires not only looking at the personal and sociological appeals that extreme ideology exerts but also considering how to create political, administrative, educational, and economic conditions to …

Terrorist Advocacy And Exceptional Circumstances, David S. Han

Fordham Law Review

This Article proceeds as follows. Part I discusses the harmful effects of terrorist advocacy and outlines the present doctrinal treatment of such speech. Part II discusses the issue of exceptional circumstances and highlights the two approaches courts might take to account for them: applying strict scrutiny to the case at hand or broadly reformulating the First Amendment’s doctrinal boundaries. Part III sets forth my central thesis: courts should adhere to case-by-case strict scrutiny analysis, rather than broad doctrinal reformulation, as the initial means of accounting for exceptional circumstances with respect to terrorist advocacy. This approach reflects the vital importance of …

The Internet Will Not Break: Denying Bad Samaritans § 230 Immunity, Danielle Keats Citron, Benjamin Wittes

Fordham Law Review

Section 230 is overdue for a rethinking. If courts do not construe the scope of federal immunity to avoid injustice, we argue, Congress should amend the law. This is not to discount the important role that the immunity provision has played over the past twenty years. Far from it. Section 230 immunity has enabled innovation and expression beyond the imagination of the operators of early bulletin boards and computer service providers the provision was designed to protect. But its overbroad interpretation has left victims of online abuse with no leverage against site operators whose business models facilitate abuse. This state …

Entertaining Satan: Why We Tolerate Terrorist Incitement, Andrew Koppelman

Fordham Law Review

Words are dangerous. That is why governments sometimes want to suppress speech. The law of free speech reflects a settled decision that, at the time that law was adopted, the dangers were worth tolerating. But people keep dreaming up nasty new things to do with speech. Recently, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and other terrorist organizations have employed a small army of Iagos on the internet to recruit new instruments of destruction. Some of what they have posted is protected speech under present First Amendment law. In response, scholars have suggested that there should be some new …

Terrorists Are Always Muslim But Never White: At The Intersection Of Critical Race Theory And Propaganda, Caroline Mala Corbin

Fordham Law Review

When you hear the word “terrorist,” who do you picture? Chances are, it is not a white person. In the United States, two common though false narratives about terrorists who attack America abound. We see them on television, in the movies, on the news, and, currently, in the Trump administration. The first is that “terrorists are always (brown) Muslims.” The second is that “white people are never terrorists.” Different strands of critical race theory can help us understand these two narratives. One strand examines the role of unconscious cognitive biases in the production of stereotypes, such as the stereotype of …

The Internet As Marketplace Of Madness— And A Terrorist’S Best Friend, Thane Rosenbaum

Fordham Law Review

The panel I was assigned to, for this distinguished gathering of scholars at Fordham Law School, where I had previously been a professor for twentythree years, was given the name, “Caution Against Overreaching.” Overreaching and the caution it occasions, in this case, refer to the First Amendment, a uniquely American absolutist, legalistic obsession. For many who fixate on such matters, the government must never be allowed to trample upon the unfettered free speech rights guaranteed under America’s first, and most favorite, Amendment.

Terror On Your Timeline: Criminalizing Terrorist Incitement On Social Media Through Doctrinal Shift, Zachary Leibowitz

Fordham Law Review

The United States faces a barrage of threats from terrorist organizations on a daily basis. The government takes some steps to prevent these threats from coming to fruition, but not much is being done proactively. Any person can log into a social media account to preach hate and incite violence against the United States and its citizenry, and sometimes these words result in action. When speakers are not held accountable, they can continue to incite the masses to violent action across the United States. This Note proposes a new incitement doctrine to prevent these speakers from being able to spread …

Developments In Liability Theories And Defenses, Robert A. Destro

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Legal/Legislative Issues In Euthanasia And Physician-Assisted Suicide, Edward Grant

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

The Right To Self-Directed Death: Reconsidering An Ancient Proscription, G. Steven Neeley

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Ideological Plaintiffs, Administrative Lawmaking, Standing, And The Petition Clause, Karl S. Coplan

Maine Law Review

Although Article I of the Constitution vests legislative power in the Congress, the lawmaking process in this country has evolved to involve all three branches. Congress enacts regulatory programs, but delegates to the executive branch the task of formulating and legislating the details of implementation through regulations. Once the executive branch agencies have acted, Article III courts routinely step in to review the consistency of these regulations with congressional mandates. In many cases, especially in the case of controversial regulations, the lawmaking process is not complete until judicial review. Entities burdened by such regulations-so-called "regulatory objects"-enjoy presumed standing to challenge …

All Employers Must Wash Their Speech Before Returning To Work: The First Amendment & Compelled Use Of Employees’ Preferred Gender Pronouns, Tyler Sherman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Is Wall Between Church And State Crumbling? 10-10-2017, Diana Hassel

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Finding Freedom For The Thoughts We Hate, John M. Greabe

Law Faculty Scholarship

In his dissenting opinion in United States v. Schwimmer (1929), Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., famously defended tolerance as an indispensable constitutional value. He wrote: “[I]f there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought – not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”

Yet accepting that the Constitution protects the thought that we hate can be difficult, even during the best of times. And these are far from the best of times. Nuclear brinksmanship …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: Diana Hassel's Blog: Is The Wall Between Church And State Crumbling? 10-07-2017, Diana Hassel

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

The Religion Clauses Of The First Amendment: Where Is The Supreme Court Heading?, Michael W. Mcconnell

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Gay Rights Coalition V. Georgetown University: Failure To Recognize A Catholic University's Religious Liberty, Paul E. O'Connell

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

God's Green Earth? The Environmental Impacts Of Religious Land Use, Kellen Zale

Maine Law Review

Boulder County, Colorado has been at the forefront of the environmental movement for decades. Starting with its citizens’ vote in 1967 to implement a tax specifically to preserve open space, the city has long been known for its progressive environmental policies. At the center of Boulder’s environmental protection efforts is a comprehensive system of land use regulations designed to mitigate the slow chokehold of ever-encroaching development on wetlands and open space, on groundwater and soils, and on wildlife and native species. Numerous communities across the country have followed Boulder’s much-praised model and enacted their own environmental zoning laws to protect …

Hate Speech In The Schools: A Potential Change In Direction, Kevin W. Saunders

Maine Law Review

The law regarding free expression and students in the public schools has long been somewhat confused. An early Supreme Court vindication of student speech rights has eroded over the years. Yet, it is perhaps unclear how great the erosion has been and how much of the original recognition still stands. This has left the lower courts rather unwilling to protect school students from hate speech, at least in cases where there has not been a history of such speech leading to disruption or even violence. Only recently has there been some sign of change in that regard, with a few …

Zoning And The Location Of Religious Establishments, Kenneth Pearlman

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Barnett Vs. Corson. Libel—Truth Of Statement As A Defence—Malice—Act Of Apr. 11, 1901, Construed

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

A Less Corrupt Term: 2016–2017 Supreme Court Roundup, Marc O. Degirolami, Kevin C. Walsh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In these unusually turbulent times for the presidency and Congress, the Supreme Court’s latest term stands out for its lack of drama. There were no 5–4 end-of-the-term cases that mesmerized the nation. There were no blockbuster decisions.

Even so, the Court was hardly immune to the steady transformation of our governing institutions into reality TV shows. Over the weekend leading into the final day of the term, speculation ignited from who-knows-where about the possible departure of its main character, Justice Anthony Kennedy. To us, the chatter seemed forced—as if the viewing public needed something to fill the vacuum left …

Jailing The Twitter Bird: Social Media, Material Support To Terrorism, And Muzzling The Modern Press, Rachel E. Vanlandingham

Cardozo Law Review

Social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter are vulnerable to federal criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, the material support to terrorism statute, for providing a means for terrorists and their sympathizers to glorify and pursue their violence on social media. This Article exposes that vulnerability as well as the material support statute's conflicts with the First and Fifth Amendments in this context, such as the statute's chilling effect. In particular, the Article explores how social media providers have responded to threats from the U.S. government by suspending hundreds of thousands of user accounts, effectively censoring constitutionally protected …

Sidewalk Counseling: A First Amendment Right, Thomas Patrick Monaghan

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Courthouses, Bookshelves, And Portals: The Implications Of U.S. V. American Library Association On First Amendment Forum Analysis And Future Internet-Based Litigation Strategies, Alexandra R. Harrington

Oklahoma Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.