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

First Amendment Commons™

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

Constitutional Law

Institution
Keyword
Publication Year
Publication
Publication Type
File Type

Articles 1501 - 1530 of 3434

Full-Text Articles in First Amendment

Dismantling Of Dissent: Militarization And The Right To Peaceably Assemble, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud Jan 2016

Dismantling Of Dissent: Militarization And The Right To Peaceably Assemble, Emmanuel Hiram Arnaud

Faculty Scholarship

This Note argues that the ritualized use of extreme police force on peacefully assembled groups is a violation of the Assembly Clause as it was originally intended to function. Part I gives a general account of the Assembly Clause, its creation, and its original intention to safeguard minority views. Part II recounts part of the history behind the militarization of police forces. Part III suggests a balancing test the courts should use when evaluating violations of the freedom to peaceably assemble in order to conform to the original meaning of the First Amendment.

Go to article

The Problem With Free Press Absolutism, Sonja R. West Jan 2016

The Problem With Free Press Absolutism, Sonja R. West

Scholarly Works

In her important new book, The First Amendment Bubble, Professor Amy Gajda exposes the many dangers of this all-encompassing attitude about constitutional rights for the press. Sure, there may have been a time when the news media could demand- and the courts and public would grant near immunity for their work, making free press absolutism relatively costless. Yet Gajda provides example after example demonstrating that the courts no longer give the media a free pass. And as the public and the courts' opinions about the press change, Gajda warns, the news media's thinking about their legal protections must change as …

Go to article

The Media Exemption Puzzle Of Campaign Finance Laws, Sonja R. West Jan 2016

The Media Exemption Puzzle Of Campaign Finance Laws, Sonja R. West

Scholarly Works

In the 2010 case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court solidified the media exemption dilemma in campaign finance law. When attempting to address concerns about corporate campaign expenditures (i.e., corporate political speech), legislatures are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Regulate media corporations, and they violate press freedoms. Exempt media corporations from the regulations, however, and they are accused of speaker discrimination.

Thus the question of how to treat the press in campaign finance law can no longer be ignored. Can legislatures, without running afoul of the First Amendment, ever regulate …

Go to article

What Did The Supreme Court Hold In Heffernan V. City Of Paterson?, Michael Wells Jan 2016

What Did The Supreme Court Hold In Heffernan V. City Of Paterson?, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

As a favor to his mother, Jeffrey Heffernan picked up a political yard sign. His supervisors demoted him, in the mistaken belief that he had engaged in protected speech. In Heffernan v. City of Patterson, 136 S.Ct. 1412 (2016), the Supreme Court held that a public employee can sue a local government under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when a supervisor acts for constitutionally impermissible motives, even though he has not in fact exercised First Amendment rights. But the grounds for that holding are unclear. The Court may have ruled that the city, through its police chief, violated Heffernan’s First Amendment …

Go to article

The Early Years Of First Amendment Lochnerism, Jeremy K. Kessler Jan 2016

The Early Years Of First Amendment Lochnerism, Jeremy K. Kessler

Faculty Scholarship

From Citizens United to Hobby Lobby, civil libertarian challenges to the regulation of economic activity are increasingly prevalent. Critics of this trend invoke the specter of Lochner v. New York. They suggest that the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and other legislative "conscience clauses" are being used to resurrect the economically libertarian substantive due process jurisprudence of the early twentieth century. Yet the worry that aggressive judicial enforcement of the First Amendment might erode democratic regulation of the economy and enhance the economic power of private actors has a long history. As this Article demonstrates, anxieties …

Go to article

Can Dna Be Speech?, Jorge R. Roig Jan 2016

Can Dna Be Speech?, Jorge R. Roig

Scholarly Works

DNA is generally regarded as the basic building block of life itself. In the most fundamental sense, DNA is nothing more than a chemical compound, albeit a very complex and peculiar one. DNA is an information-carrying molecule. The specific sequence of base pairs contained in a DNA molecule carries with it genetic information, and encodes for the creation of particular proteins. When taken as a whole, the DNA contained in a single human cell is a complete blueprint and instruction manual for the creation of that human being. In this article we discuss myriad current and developing ways in which …

Go to article

Shareholder Political Primacy, Jay B. Kesten Jan 2016

Shareholder Political Primacy, Jay B. Kesten

Scholarly Publications

Corporate political activity raises an important and difficult question of corporate law: who decides when the corporation should speak and what it should say? In several cases, the Supreme Court has provided a clear answer: shareholders, acting through the procedures of corporate democracy. While this holding has attracted substantial academic and public criticism, there has been no sustained evaluation (beyond identifying the potential agency costs of corporate political activity) of the possibility that the Supreme Court's appeal to the fraught concept of "corporate democracy," though woefully under-theorized, might be the best allocation of power in the limited context of corporate …

Go to article

The Government’S Lies And The Constitution, Helen L. Norton Dec 2015

The Government’S Lies And The Constitution, Helen L. Norton

Indiana Law Journal

The government’s lies can be devastating. This is the case, for example, of its lies told to resist legal and political accountability for its misconduct; to inflict economic and reputational harm; or to enable the exercise of its powers to imprison, to deploy lethal force, and to commit precious national resources. On the other hand, the government’s lies can sometimes be helpful: consider lies told to thwart a military adversary or to identify wrongdoing through undercover police work. The substantial harms threatened by some government lies invite a search for ways to punish and prevent them. At the same time, …

Go to article

Religion And Social Coherentism, Nelson Tebbe Dec 2015

Religion And Social Coherentism, Nelson Tebbe

Notre Dame Law Review

Today, prominent academics are questioning the very possibility of a theory of free exercise or non-establishment. They argue that judgments in the area can only be conclusory or irrational. In contrast to such skeptics, this Essay argues that decisionmaking on questions of religious freedom can be morally justified. Two arguments constitute the Essay. Part I begins by acknowledging that skepticism has power. The skeptics rightly identify some inevitable indeterminacy, but they mistakenly argue that it necessarily signals decisionmaking that is irrational or unjustified. Their critique is especially striking because the skeptics’ prudential way of working on concrete problems actually shares …

Go to article

Telescoping And Collectivizing Religious Free Exercise Rights, Henry L. Chambers Jr Dec 2015

Telescoping And Collectivizing Religious Free Exercise Rights, Henry L. Chambers Jr

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Noriega V. Activision/Blizzard: The First Amendment Right To Use A Historical Figure's Likeness In Video Games, Joshua Sinclair Nov 2015

Noriega V. Activision/Blizzard: The First Amendment Right To Use A Historical Figure's Likeness In Video Games, Joshua Sinclair

Duke Law & Technology Review

Panama’s former dictator, Manuel Noriega, recently sued Activision Blizzard in the California Superior Court for using his likeness and image in the popular video game “Call of Duty: Black Ops II.” In his complaint, Noriega alleged that the use of his likeness violated his right of publicity. Former New York Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, came to Activision’s defense, and filed a motion to dismiss, which was granted. In granting Activision’s motion, the court held that Activision’s use of Noriega’s likeness was transformative and did not violate his right of publicity. This Issue Brief argues that the California Superior Court should not …

Go to article

Law, Religion, And Politics: Understanding The Separation Of Church And State, Richard Garnett Nov 2015

Law, Religion, And Politics: Understanding The Separation Of Church And State, Richard Garnett

Faculty Workshops

Professor Richard Garnett, of University of Notre Dame Law School, presented on the topic Law, Religion, and Politics: Understanding the Separation of Church and State. This workshop was presented as part of the Hesburgh Lecture Series through the Alumni & Friends of University of Notre Dame and was co-sponsored by the Notre Dame Alumni Club of Miami. This workshop examined how to understand the Constitution's "separation of church and state" and what it requires of religious believers and institutions.

Go to article

A Benign Prior Restraint Rule For Public School Classroom Speech, Scott R. Bauries Nov 2015

A Benign Prior Restraint Rule For Public School Classroom Speech, Scott R. Bauries

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article is a contribution to a symposium on schools and free speech. It advances the claim that the First Amendment doctrines that apply to the classroom should adopt a benign prior restraint rule. In the case of teacher classroom speech, the Garcetti rule should apply where the government’s action in interfering with the speech constitutes a prior restraint—the First Amendment should not reach such interference. In cases where a teacher first speaks and then is later punished for that speech, however, basic notions of due process and the dangers of arbitrary governmental decision making are far more pressing, and …

Go to article

Religion And Social Coherentism, Nelson Tebbe Nov 2015

Religion And Social Coherentism, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Today, prominent academics are questioning the very possibility of a theory of free exercise or non-establishment. They argue that judgments in the area can only be conclusory or irrational. In contrast to such skeptics, this Essay argues that decisionmaking on questions of religious freedom can be morally justified. Two arguments constitute the Essay. Part I begins by acknowledging that skepticism has power. The skeptics rightly identify some inevitable indeterminacy, but they mistakenly argue that it necessarily signals decisionmaking that is irrational or unjustified. Their critique is especially striking because the skeptics’ prudential way of working on concrete problems actually shares …

Go to article

High Value Lies, Ugly Truths, And The First Amendment, Alan K. Chen, Justin Marceau Nov 2015

High Value Lies, Ugly Truths, And The First Amendment, Alan K. Chen, Justin Marceau

Vanderbilt Law Review

Lying has a complicated relationship with the First Amendment. It is beyond question that some lies-such as perjury and fraud-are simply not covered by the Constitution's free speech clause.' But it is equally clear that some lies, even intentionally lying about military honors, are entitled to First Amendment protection. Until very recently, however, it has been taken for granted in Supreme Court doctrine and academic writing that any constitutional protection for lies is purely prophylactic-it provides protection to the truth-speaker by also incidentally protecting the liar. What remains unresolved is whether other rationales might also justify First Amendment protection for …

Go to article

Regulating Drones Under The First And Fourth Amendments, Marc Jonathan Blitz, James Grimsley, Stephen E. Henderson, Joseph Thai Oct 2015

Regulating Drones Under The First And Fourth Amendments, Marc Jonathan Blitz, James Grimsley, Stephen E. Henderson, Joseph Thai

William & Mary Law Review

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requires the Federal Aviation Administration to integrate unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, into the national airspace system by September 2015. Yet perhaps because of their chilling accuracy in targeted killings abroad, perhaps because of an increasing consciousness of diminishing privacy more generally, and perhaps simply because of a fear of the unknown, divergent UAV-restrictive legislation has been proposed in Congress and enacted in a number of states. Given UAV utility and cost-effectiveness over a vast range of tasks, however, widespread commercial use ultimately seems certain. Consequently, it is imperative to understand …

Go to article

Content-Based Copyright Denial, Ned Snow Oct 2015

Content-Based Copyright Denial, Ned Snow

Indiana Law Journal

No principle of First Amendment law is more firmly established than the principle that government may not restrict speech based on its content. It would seem to follow, then, that Congress may not withhold copyright protection for disfavored categories of content, such as violent video games or pornography. This Article argues otherwise. This Article is the first to recognize a distinction in the scope of coverage between the First Amendment and the Copyright Clause. It claims that speech protection from government censorship does not imply speech protection from private copying. Crucially, I argue that this distinction in the scope of …

Go to article

Sign Regulation After Reed: Suggestions For Coping With Legal Uncertainty, Alan C. Weinstein Oct 2015

Sign Regulation After Reed: Suggestions For Coping With Legal Uncertainty, Alan C. Weinstein

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article discusses Reed v. Town of Gilbert, in which the Court resolved a Circuit split over what constitutes content based sign regulations. We note that Justice Thomas's majority opinion applies a mechanical "need to read" approach to this question, and then explore the doctrinal and practical concerns raised by this approach. Doctrinally, we explore the tensions between Thomas's "need to read" approach and the Court's current approach of treating some regulation of speech as content-neutral despite the fact that a message must be read to determine its regulatory treatment. A prime example being the Court's "secondary effects" doctrine. …

Go to article

Injury-In-Fact In Chilling Effect Challenges To Public University Speech Codes, Jennifer L. Bruneau Sep 2015

Injury-In-Fact In Chilling Effect Challenges To Public University Speech Codes, Jennifer L. Bruneau

Catholic University Law Review

Campus speech codes began to spring up on university campuses during the 1980s and continue to operate today. The codes regulate various forms of arguably offensive speech, including speech regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, ideology, views, and political affiliation. Numerous litigants have challenged the chilling effect these policies have on student and faculty speech, but in cases where the challenged code has not yet been enforced, some courts find that the plaintiff has not met the “injury-in-fact” requirement for Article III standing. The Supreme Court has not ruled on standing requirements in speech code challenges and lower courts are divided. …

Go to article

Sign Regulation After Reed: Suggestions For Coping With Legal Uncertainty, Alan Weinstein, Brian Connolly Sep 2015

Sign Regulation After Reed: Suggestions For Coping With Legal Uncertainty, Alan Weinstein, Brian Connolly

All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications

This article discusses Reed v. Town of Gilbert, in which the Court resolved a Circuit split over what constitutes content based sign regulations. We note that Justice Thomas's majority opinion applies a mechanical "need to read" approach to this question, and then explore the doctrinal and practical concerns raised by this approach. Doctrinally, we explore the tensions between Thomas's "need to read" approach and the Court's current approach of treating some regulation of speech as content-neutral despite the fact that a message must be read to determine its regulatory treatment. A prime example being the Court's "secondary effects" doctrine. Practically, …

Go to article

The Protection Accorded Picketing By The First Amendment, Joseph J. Corso Aug 2015

The Protection Accorded Picketing By The First Amendment, Joseph J. Corso

Akron Law Review

In the context of labor law, the origin of the relationship between free speech and peaceful picketing is the case of Thornhill v. Alabama. The speech aspects of picketing and the necessarily accompanying First Amendment protections were stressed by the Supreme Court in holding unconstitutional a state statute which constituted a broad ban on all picketing. The Court expressly limited the holding by recognizing that a narrowly worded statute, such as one merely interdicting picketing en masse or picketing portending imminent danger may be valid. An additional limitation of the decision is the fact that it was reached under a …

Go to article

Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan, Bruce C. Heslop Aug 2015

Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan, Bruce C. Heslop

Akron Law Review

Viewed in its broad perspective, Parker v. Morgan has further clarified and circumscribed the constitutional limits of the state's power to protect the American flag from public acts of desecration. In this respect it may be considered to provide further insight into the constitutional questions involved in this relatively untouched area of the law. However, until authoritative consideration has been given to the nature and source of those protective powers which are reserved to a state, Parker v. Morgan cannot be regarded to have drawn the ultimate lines of demarcation for the constitutional validity of flag desecration statutes. A meaningful …

Go to article

Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California, Stacy E. Wolfe Aug 2015

Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California, Stacy E. Wolfe

Akron Law Review

It has been over fifteen years since the Supreme Court embarked on its precarious course of determining the Constitutional boundaries for control of obscenity by the state and federal governments. The Court's first attempt to define the meaning of obscenity and ultimately determine the Constitutional protection afforded this expression was in Roth v. United States. What has followed can only be characterized as a series of irreconcilable conflicts and discrepancies that have left the law in this area in total confusion. Recently, the Court in Miller v. California has again attempted to provide "concrete guidelines to isolate 'hard core' pornography …

Go to article

Chipping Away At The First Amendment: Newspapermen Must Disclose Sources, Michael F. Buchicchio Aug 2015

Chipping Away At The First Amendment: Newspapermen Must Disclose Sources, Michael F. Buchicchio

Akron Law Review

This Comment will explore the background and history of the journalistic privilege in light of case law and early constitutional argument. It will analyze the recent Supreme Court decisions denying a privilege to newsmen to conceal their sources, and attempt to explain how this privilege can best be maintained.

Go to article

Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein Aug 2015

Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein

Akron Law Review

The state has the power to regulate the distribution of liquor and enforce health and safety regulations, but the state may not broadly stifle First Amendment freedoms when doing so. "The breath of legislative abridgement must be viewed in the light of less drastic means for achieving the same basic purpose." s The Court has consistently held that only a compelling state interest in the regulation of a subject within the state's constitutional power to regulate can justify limiting First Amendment freedoms.

Go to article

The "Compulsory School Attendance" Case: Wisconsin V. Yoder, Michael Buchicchio Aug 2015

The "Compulsory School Attendance" Case: Wisconsin V. Yoder, Michael Buchicchio

Akron Law Review

It is an important constitutional doctrine that a law generally constitutional "on its face," may be unconstitutional "as applied" in specific instances. The Amish case marks the first occasion that the Court has clearly articulated that exception in favor of a minority religious group. It would appear that compulsory education laws are-"on their face"--within a state's constitutional powers, but under the facts of this case, the First Amendment requires that the Amish be exempt.

Go to article

Corporations; First Amendment Rights; State Ex Rel Grant V. Brown, Theodore David Itzkowitz Aug 2015

Corporations; First Amendment Rights; State Ex Rel Grant V. Brown, Theodore David Itzkowitz

Akron Law Review

IN AUGUST 9, 1972 the Relators, Greater Cincinnati Gay Society, tendered articles of incorporation for a non-profit corporation to the Secretary of State of Ohio, under provisions of the Ohio Revised Code. The Secretary of State refused to accept the incorporation papers, however, claiming that the purpose of the group, which was to promote acceptance of homosexuality as a valid life style, was contrary to public policy, since homosexuality was then a criminal act.

Go to article

The Control Of Seditious Libel As A Basis For The Development Of The Law Of Obscenity, Ronald W. Eades Aug 2015

The Control Of Seditious Libel As A Basis For The Development Of The Law Of Obscenity, Ronald W. Eades

Akron Law Review

In the United States there are government controls of at least two types of press, seditious libel and obscenity. Even though the first amendment protects speech and press, libels against the government and obscenity have not been given free reign, and have been consistently controlled. Although the conflicts over seditious libel aided the development of current standards of freedom of the press, the controls of obscenity have not yet completed that development and are inconsistent with those first amendment standards.

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa

Akron Law Review

“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”

Go to article

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz Jul 2015

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz

Akron Law Review

"The decision of Metpath, Inc. v. Imperato is indicative of the growing trend of the judiciary toward affording "commercial speech" the protective shield of the first amendment. As shown by Metpath, where the concern is advertising by a medical clinic, speech with commercial overtones is afforded protection where a public interest in the subject and content of the speech is demonstrated. However, the perimeters of such protection have not been defined by this or previous decisions."

Go to article

First Prev Next Last