First Amendment Commons^™

First Amendment And "Foreign-Controlled" U.S. Corporations: Why Congress Ought To Affirm Domestic Subsidiaries' Corporate Political-Speech Rights, Scott L. Friedman

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Political spending in the modern-day, prolonged election cycle continues to exceed historic proportions. With money equated to speech, whether the First Amendment entitles certain contributors to engage in this political activity remains an open question. Unlike France and Israel, which prohibit corporate contributions, and Canada and the United Kingdom, which turn to public funding for campaign finance, the United States has pushed candidates to rely on political party contributions, personal wealth, and the generosity of individuals, political action committees, and corporations. Concerns about corporate and foreign influence on politics have been especially salient during this lengthy economic downturn, as shown …

The First Amendment, Equal Protection, And Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint, Janai S. Nelson

Faculty Publications

This Article engages the equality principles of the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause to reconsider the constitutionality of one of the last and most entrenched barriers to universal suffrage—felon disenfranchisement. A deeply racialized problem, felon disenfranchisement is additionally and independently a legislative judgment as to which citizen's ideas are worthy of inclusion in the electorate. Relying on a series of cases involving state interests in protecting the ballot and promoting its intelligent use, this Article demonstrates that felon disenfranchisement is open to attack under the Supreme Court's fundamental rights jurisprudence when it is motivated by a desire to …

False Statements V. Free Debate: Is The First Amendment A License To Lie In Elections?, Simon A. Rodell

Florida Law Review

No abstract provided.

Televised Political Debates And Arkansas Educational Television Commission V. Forbes: Excluding The Public From Public Broadcasting, Joshua Dale

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Can Freedom Of Speech Bear The Twenty-First Century's Weight?, Lillian R. Bevier

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Campaign Finance Regulation And The Marketplace Of Emotions, Barry P. Mcdonald

Pepperdine Law Review

This essay examines the validity, in light of new empirical research, of the free speech theory the U.S. Supreme Court uses to justify the doctrines it currently employs to assess the constitutionality of campaign finance regulations. The Court’s model, which Professor McDonald terms the theory of 'stimulated democratic deliberation,' assumes that an unlimited quantity of campaign-related communications will result in increased public deliberation about ideas and better informed citizens, which in turn will result in better decisions about candidates for political office. In short, this model assumes that rational thought and deliberation about important issues of the day drive voter …

The Constitutional Logic Of Campaign Finance Regulation, Samuel Issacharoff

Pepperdine Law Review

This essay explores the potential implications of the creation of a distinct "election period" through the BCRA reforms to campaign finance law. The idea of a separate set of rights of expression during the immediate pre-election period is a relative newcomer to American law, but is a central feature of campaign finance law in other countries. The creation of a defined election period is the underpinning of strong restrictions on political speech in countries such as Britain, and is currently the source of tension under European law. Recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, most notably in Bowman …

Secrets, Lies, And Disclosure, Helen Norton

Publications

This symposium essay suggests that we can sometimes understand those who resist campaign disclosure or disclaimer requirements as interested in keeping a secret and occasionally even in telling a sort of lie about the source or intensity of support for a particular candidate or cause. Such secrets and lies threaten listeners’ autonomy interests when the speaker seeks to keep such secrets (and sometimes seeks to tell such lies) to enhance her ability to influence her listeners’ decisions. For these reasons, I suggest greater attention to the reasons speakers seek to keep secrets (or occasionally tell such lies) in assessing the …

Public Corruption Concerns And Counter-Majoritarian Democracy Definition In Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Daaron Kimmel

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In determining the shape of the free speech rights and anti-corruption concerns that courts must balance in campaign finance cases, judges are influenced by their own underlying understandings of what an ideal democracy should look like. For judges to decide whether the government is appropriately regulating the political process, the rules that allow all citizens to interact with and shape their democracy, judges must first decide what that democracy ought to look like. This affords judges a great deal of discretion in campaign finance cases. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a particularly bold judicial attempt to reshape the …

Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club Pac V. Bennett, Et Al.: Brief For Amici Curiae Professors Of Constitutional And Election Law In Support Of Respondents, Ellen D. Katz

Appellate Briefs

Amici states confront significant issues of citizen confidence in both state and national governments. We wish to share our view that public financing of state elections should remain available as a tool to restore public confidence.

While specific sources of discontent vary from state to state, at the root of the problem is a sense of powerlessness among the citizenry, powerlessness in the face of large governments and other ever larger financial and business institutions. Whatever one may think of changes proposed by the Tea Party movement, its existence may be traced rather directly to the frustration of ordinary people …

Foreword: The Impact Of Citizens United, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. Xxiii (2011), Steven D. Schwinn

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Commentary: Campaign Finance In The Wake Of Citizens United, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 583 (2011), Thomas E. Mann

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Small-Donor Public Financing In The Post-Citizens United Era, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 619 (2011), Monica Youn

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Capitalist Joker: The Strange Origins, Disturbing Past, And Uncertain Future Of Corporate Personhood In American Law, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 643 (2011), David H. Gans, Douglas T. Kendall

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

So What If Corporations Aren't People?, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 701 (2011), Ilya Shapiro, Caitlyn W. Mccarthy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Citizens United And Tiered Personhood, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 717 (2011), Atiba R. Ellis

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ending A Peculiar Evil: The Constitution, Campaign Finance Reform, And The Need For Change In Focus After Citizens United V. Fec, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 773 (2011), Carson Griffis

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Back To The Future? The Effects Of Citizens United V. Fec In The 2010 Election, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 595 (2011), Peter L. Francia

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Historical Roots Of Citizens United Vs. Fec: How Anarchists And Academics Accidentally Created Corporate Speech Rights, The General Essay, Zephyr Teachout

Faculty Scholarship

This paper looks at how the early rhetoric around the First Amendment enabled later development of corporate political speech rights.

Campaign Speech Law With A Twist: When The Government Is The Speaker, Not The Regulator, Helen Norton

Publications

Although government entities frequently engage in issue-related campaign speech on a variety of contested ballot and legislative measures, this fact has been entirely overlooked in contemporary First Amendment debates over campaign speech law specifically and government speech more generally. The Supreme Court's "campaign speech" and "government speech" dockets have focused to date on claims by private parties that the government has restricted or silenced their speech in violation of the First Amendment. In contrast, disputes over what this Article calls "governmental campaign speech" involve Free Speech Clause and other challenges by private parties who seek instead to silence the government's …

Citizens United And The Illusion Of Coherence, Richard L. Hasen

Michigan Law Review

The self-congratulatory tone of the majority and concurring opinions in last term's controversial Supreme Court blockbuster, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, extended beyond the trumpeting of an absolutist vision of the First Amendment that allows corporations to spend unlimited sums independently to support or oppose candidates for office. The triumphalism extended to the majority's view that it had imposed coherence on the unwieldy body of campaign finance jurisprudence by excising an "outlier" 1990 opinion, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which had upheld such corporate limits, and parts of a 2003 opinion, McConnell v. FEC, extending Austin to unions …

Citizens Disunited, Steven L. Winter

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

The Transformation Of Freedom Of Speech: Unsnarling The Twisted Roots Of Citizens United V. Fec, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 69 (2010), Steven J. André

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Myth Of The Level Playing Field: Knowledge, Affect, And Repetition In Public Debate, Jeremy N. Sheff

Faculty Publications

The industrialization of the channels and scale of communication has led some well-meaning reformers to try to regulate the ability of powerful private actors to leverage economic inequality into political inequality, particularly in the area of campaign finance. Such reform efforts are ostensibly intended to further the deliberative democratic ideal of rational, informed public decision making by preventing well-funded private interests from improperly influencing democratic debate and, by extension, political outcomes. This Article examines empirical findings in political science, psychology, and marketing and argues that, in the context of contemporary American society, the normative principles of deliberative democracy and formal …

Free Speech & Tainted Justice: Restoring The Public's Confidence In The Judiciary In The Wake Of Republican Party Of Minnesota V. White, Gregory W. Jones

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The United States Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White was the first shot fired in an ongoing battle over judicial campaign ethics. The White decision invalidated a Minnesota Canon of Judicial Conduct prohibiting judicial candidates from announcing their views on disputed legal or political topics. Subsequent to White, numerous states have faced challenges to their judicial canons of conduct by groups advocating for an increased breadth of permissible speech in judicial campaigns. While White and its progeny have safeguarded the first amendment rights of judicial candidates, significant concerns have been raised regarding how best to …

Safeguarding The Integrity Of Tribal Elections Through Campaign Finance Regulation, Paul W. Shagen

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article argues that Indian tribes must enact comprehensive campaign finance regulations to protect the integrity of their electoral processes, balancing the need to prevent corruption with First Amendment rights. These regulations must navigate the restrictive framework set by the Montana ruling, which limits tribal authority over nonmembers, while leveraging tribal sovereignty and cultural values to uphold self-governance. The analysis emphasizes the importance of aligning such regulations with both the Buckley framework and tribal constitutions to ensure enforceability and respect for collective interests.

Buying Back Elections: Extending Supreme Court Speech Limitations To Eliminate Leadership Pacs, Justin Luehman

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article critiques the current campaign finance system, arguing that the Supreme Court's interpretation of money as speech under the First Amendment has enabled undue influence by wealthy donors and political action committees (PACs), particularly leadership PACs. The author advocates for treating money as property rather than speech to allow stricter regulations and prevent corruption. By extending the "one person, one vote" principle to campaign finance, the article proposes a system where political influence is not dictated by wealth, ensuring equal representation and transparency.

Conditions On Taking The Initiative: The First Amendment Implications Of Subject Matter Restrictions On Ballot Initiatives, Anna Skiba-Crafts

Michigan Law Review

Nearly half of U.S. states offer a ballot initiative process that citizens may use to pass legislation or constitutional amendments by a popular vote. Some states, however, impose substantive restrictions on the types of initiatives citizens may submit to the ballot for a vote-precluding, for example, initiatives lowering drug penalties or initiatives related to religion. Circuit courts are split on whether and how such restrictions implicate the First Amendment. This Note argues that-rather than limiting "expressive conduct" protected only minimally by the First Amendment, or limiting pure conduct that does not garner any First Amendment protectionsubject matter restrictions on ballot …

Zero-Sum Judicial Elections: Balancing Free Speech And Impartiality Through Recusal Reform, David K. Stott

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Speech & (And) Election Law: Freedom Of Speech Vs. Anti-Discrimination Laws, David Bernstein, Andrew Koppelman, Kenneth L. Marcus, Eugene Volokh

North Carolina Central Law Review

No abstract provided.