First Amendment Commons^™

Today's Porn: Not A Constitutional Right; Not A Human Right, Patrick Trueman

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Amend The Communications Decency Act To Protect Victims Of Sexual Exploitation, Samantha Vardaman

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

The Freedom From Sexploitation Agenda: Policy And Legislative Recommendations To Curb Sexual Exploitation, Dawn Hawkins

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Sony, Cyber Security, And Free Speech: Preserving The First Amendment In The Modern World, Conrad Wilton

Pace Intellectual Property, Sports & Entertainment Law Forum

Reprinted from 16 U.C. Davis Bus. L.J. 309 (2016). This paper explores the Sony hack in 2014 allegedly launched by the North Korean government in retaliation over Sony’s production of The Interview and considers the hack’s chilling impact on speech in technology. One of the most devastating cyber attacks in history, the hack exposed approximately thirty- eight million files of sensitive data, including over 170,000 employee emails, thousands of employee social security numbers and unreleased footage of upcoming movies. The hack caused Sony to censor the film and prompted members of the entertainment industry at large to tailor their communication …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: Andrew Horwitz's Blog: First Amendment Protects The Right To Give And To Receive 05-23-2017, Andrew Horwitz

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

With Chelsea Manning's Release, Lead Trial Attorney Coombs Recalls Case: Rwu Law Professor David E. Coombs Revisits Issues In The Case, Looks Forward To Teaching Again Next Year 05-17-2017, Edward Fitzpatrick

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Trump: Full Employment For Lawyers 04-04-2017, David Logan

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Updating The Social Network: How Outdated And Unclear State Legislation Violates Sex Offenders’ First Amendment Rights, Elizabeth Tolon

Fordham Law Review

Readily available on computers, phones, tablets, or television, social media has become a necessary platform of expression for many. But, for others, social media is an inaccessible tool whose very use has criminal repercussions. To protect innocent children, many states have enacted legislation restricting sex offenders’ access to social media. Unfortunately, this legislation is often outdated, overly restrictive, and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. North Carolina has recently attracted national attention, as its statute highlights the potential constitutional issues states face in drafting such legislation. To avoid the constitutional concerns that North Carolina faces, state legislators must draft statutes narrowly …

Denial Of Harm: Sex Trafficking, Backpage, And Free Speech Absolutism, Jody Raphael

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

#Protestersrightsmatter: The Case Against Increased Criminal Penalties For Protesters Blocking Roadways, Caroline M. Moos

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

No abstract provided.

A Right To Know How You'll Die: A First Amendment Challenge To State Secrecy Statutes Regarding Lethal Injection Drugs, Kelly A. Mennemeier

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

In the years since 2008, when the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a commonly used lethal injection protocol in Baze v. Rees, states have shifted away from the approved protocol and turned towards new drugs, drug protocols, and drug sources to carry out state-sponsored executions by lethal injection. Even as states have shifted to new, untested protocols and less-regulated sources than they used in pre-Baze years, state legislatures have enacted and amended secrecy statutes that hide information about the drug protocols and sources of lethal injection drugs from the press, the public, and condemned prisoners. Meanwhile, a …

Freedom Of Speech And The Criminal Law, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Because the Free Speech Clause limits government power to enact penal statutes, it has a close relationship to American criminal law. This Article explores that relationship at a time when a fast-growing “decriminalization movement” has taken hold across the nation. At the heart of the Article is the idea that free speech law has developed in ways that have positioned the Supreme Court to use that law to impose significant new limits on the criminalization of speech. More particularly, this article claims that the Court has developed three distinct decision-making strategies for decriminalizing speech based on constitutional principles. The first …

The Institutional Case For Partisan Gerrymandering Claims, G. Michael Parsons

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

For voters hoping the Supreme Court’s 2017 Term brings relief from partisan gerrymandering, the end of the 2016 Term was inauspicious. In Cooper v. Harris, the majority assumed the legitimacy of “partisan advantage” arguments while the dissent—including Justice Kennedy—warned about the “serious institutional and federalism implications” of judicial intervention in the redistricting process. If past is prologue, this concern for institutional and structural interests does not bode well.

Fighting Back Against Revenge Porn: A Legislative Solution, Alex Jacobs

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And The Police In The Digital Age, Kermit V. Lipez

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Testimony On Unmanned Aircraft Systems Rules And Regulations, Stephen Henderson

Other Faculty Publications

Chairman Barrington, Vice Chair Brooks, members of the Committee on Public Safety, Senators, and distinguished guests, I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today about unmanned aerial systems, or drones, and more particularly about their federal constitutional implications and what might be the constitutional restrictions on any legislation you might like to enact. I am the Judge Haskell A. Holloman Professor of Law at the University of Oklahoma, where my teaching and research focus on criminal law and procedure and privacy, including the constitutional rights pertaining thereto.My topic is not an easy one. The constitutional law is …

Human Rights Law And Racial Hate Speech Regulation In Australia: Reform And Replace?, Dr. Alan Berman

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Beyond Body Cameras: Defending A Robust Right To Record The Police, Jocelyn Simonson

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Prosecuting Online Threats After Elonis, Michael Pierce

Northwestern University Law Review

In Elonis v. United States, decided last term, the Supreme Court vacated a conviction for online threats on the ground that the lower court erred in its instructions to the jury regarding mens rea. In doing so, however, the Court declined to articulate which mens rea standard would have sustained a conviction. It is thus currently uncertain which mens rea the government must prove when prosecuting online threats under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c). The Elonis Court discussed three potential mens rea standards; as universal standards for online threats, each leaves something to be desired. Fortunately, federal courts need not …

The Commercial Sexual Exploiutation Of Minors, The First Amendment, And Freedom: Why Backpage.Com Should Be Prevented From Selling America's Children For Sex, Anna Makatche

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Why Properly Policing A Movement Matters: A Response To Alafair Burke’S Policing, Protestors, And Discretion, Lenese Herbert

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Policing, Protestors, And Discretion, Alafair Burke

Fordham Urban Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Unpunishable Immorality, Ramzi Nasser

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Following In The European Union’S Footsteps: Why The United States Should Adopt Its Own “Right To Be Forgotten” Law For Crime Victims, 32 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 185 (2016), Erin Cooper

UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law

This comment aims to look at this intersection between Google search results, their lack of removal options in the United States, and the potential harm this can cause crime victims. The comment will begin by assessing Google’s method for delivering search results, and its general removal process for most non-European nations. Then, this comment will continue by looking at the European Union and its “right to be forgotten” ruling that allows people in certain circumstances to remove their personal information from the Internet, and what the United States can learn from its implementation. Moreover, we will then contrast the European …

Alternative Restrictions Of Sex Offenders' Social Media Use & The Freedom Of Speech, Norah M. Sloss

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.

Proof Of Scienter In Criminal Obscenity Prosecutions, James P. Edmiston

Akron Law Review

Beginning in 1957 with the landmark case of Roth v. United States, and continuing to the present, the courts and legislatures of this country have embarked on a determined, if somewhat confused, effort to prove Milton wrong. The social demand for the enactment and strict enforcement of obscenity laws, designed to remove both the material and its purveyors from society, has placed an enormous burden on the courts, which are charged with interpreting the vagaries of this country's obscenity laws as well as balancing the need for control of obscenity with constitutional freedoms.

Bad News: Privacy Ruling To Increase Press Litigation, The Florida Star V. B.J.F., Mary Ellen Hockwalt

Akron Law Review

This note analyzes the history and precedent upon which the Court relied in reaching Florida Star's "harsh outcome." Next, the note discusses how the Court, by refusing to extend its holding beyond the facts of the case and give broad Constitutional protection to publications of truth, failed to provide lower courts with any guidance in deciding future invasion of privacy actions. Finally, the note examines the Court's balancing test: weighing the privacy interests of a crime victim against the newspaper's freedom to print truthful information.

An Analysis Of The Legality Of Television Cameras Broadcasting Juror Deliberations In A Criminal Case, Daniel H. Erskine Esq.

Akron Law Review

This work sets out the constitutional, statutory, and common law applicable to television’s intrusion into the jury room. The first section addresses federal constitutional considerations focusing on Article III Section 2, the Sixth Amendment, and the First Amendment. The second section analyzes certain federal rules and particular statutes applicable to televising federal judicial proceedings, as well as the rationale behind their enactment. Finally, the third section discusses comparative approaches addressing television’s intrusion into the courtroom, particularly focusing on recent jurisprudence from the European Court of Human Rights and the Scottish Court of Session.

Overcriminalizing Speech, Michal Buchhandler-Raphael

Cardozo Law Review

Recent years have seen a significant expansion in the criminal justice system's use of various preemptive measures, aimed to prevent harm before it occurs. This development consists of adopting a myriad of prophylactic statutes, including endangerment crimes, which target behaviors that merely pose a risk of future harm but are not in themselves harmful at the time they are committed.

This Article demonstrates that a significant portion of these endangerment crimes criminalize various forms of speech and expression. Examples include conspiracies, attempts, verbal harassment, instructional speech on how to commit crimes, and possession crimes. The Article argues that in contrast …

Social Media Thoughtcrimes, Daniel S. Harawa

Pace Law Review

As people live out their lives online, what is protected expression and what is criminal speech? This article begins to explore this fine distinction, and advocates for a shift in the way online speech is protected vis-à-vis the First Amendment. Part I provides examples of criminalized social media activity and explores why people seemingly treat online speech as private communications. Part II looks at existing jurisprudence regarding the criminalization of speech and First Amendment protections. And Part III attempts to determine where to draw the line by advocating for a return to simpler times in First Amendment jurisprudence.