First Amendment Commons^™

Workplace Censorship: A Response To Professor Sangree, Kingsley R. Browne

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Maintaining Order In The Post-Strike Workplace: Employee Expression And The Scope Of Section 7, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

In the aftermath of a typical strike, management often seeks to restore order to the workplace by imposing restrictions on employee expression. Although in principle employee expression is protected by section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, courts, relying on outdated notions of workplace organization, often accept ad hoc management justifications for restrictions on employee expression. The author argues that after a strike, it is crucial for employees to be able to express their grievances or vent their frustrations at exactly the same time that employers feel it necessary to restrict expression as a way of re-imposing order in …

Verbal Sexual Harassment As Equality-Depriving Conduct, Keith R. Fentonmiller

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this Note argues that commentators like Browne and some courts have mischaracterized the harm of verbal sexual harassment as mere "offense." Rather, the true harm of a sexually hostile environment created by words and expressive conduct extends beyond offense, emotional distress, and economic displacement; at bottom, the harm is equality-deprivation.

Part II explains how a sexually hostile environment is equality-depriving by arguing that words which create a sexually hostile environment must be understood in historical and social context. Words can be used not only to communicate ideas but also to perform acts of coercion and sexual abuse. …

An Enriched Economic Model Of Political Patronage And Campaign Contributions: Reformulating Supreme Court Jurisprudence, Richard L. Hasen

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Constitutional Right Of Religious Exemption: An Historical Perspective, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Did late eighteenth-century Americans understand the Free Exercise Clause of the United States Constitution to provide individuals a right of exemption from civil laws to which they had religious objections? Claims of exemption based on the Free Exercise Clause have prompted some of the Supreme Court's most prominent free exercise decisions, and therefore this historical inquiry about a right of exemption may have implications for our constitutional jurisprudence. Even if the Court does not adopt late eighteenth-century ideas about the free exercise of religion, we may, nonetheless, find that the history of such ideas can contribute to our contemporary analysis. …

Title Vii As Censorship: Hostile Environment Harassment And The First Amendment, Kingsley R. Browne

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Free Speech And Compulsory Union Fees: An Analysis Of Lehnert V. Ferris Faculty Association, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Ass'n, 500 U.S. 507 (1991). The author expected the case to address the line between those types of activities that effectuate a union's duties as collective bargaining representative, and thus can be charged to non-members, and those activities that are not related to collective bargaining and therefore are not chargeable to objecting non-members.

Dedication To Karl Krastin, Lester Brickman

Articles

The article pays tribute to Karl Krastin, highlighting his significant influence on the author's academic and professional journey. Krastin, a proponent of the "Law, Science, and Policy" approach, played a pivotal role in mentoring the author and other scholars, guiding them towards Yale's graduate program and into law teaching. His leadership as dean at Toledo College of Law fostered institutional growth and intellectual development, despite challenges arising from his democratic management style.

"Discrimination" On The Basis Of Religion: An Examination Of Attempted Value Neutrality In Employment, Laura S. Underkuffler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Labor, Management, And The First Amendment: Whose Rights Are These, Anyway?, Richard Michael Fischl

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Labor Rights And Access To Private Property: The Nlrb And The Right To Exclude, Dianne Avery

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Webster V. Doe, Lewis F. Powell, Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

The Judicial Performance Of Robert H. Bork In Administrative And Regulatory Law, Richard B. Stewart

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The White House Report: Information On Judge Bork's Qualifications, Judicial Record & Related Subjects

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Some Comments On Obscenities, Health And Safety, And Workplace Values, Robert J. Rabin

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Connick V. Myers: New Restrictions On The Free Speech Rights Of Government Employees, Peter C. Mccabe Iii

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Drawing Lines And Defining Remedies: The Impact Of Ellis V. Brotherhood Of Railway, Airline And Steamship Clerks On The First Amendment Rights Of Dissident Employees, Shane R. Swindle

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comments On Judicial Nullification Of Jury Awards In Public Official And Public Figure Libel Suits, William P. Murphy

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And Nonpicketing Labor Publicity Under Section 8(B)(4)(Ii)(B) Of The National Labor Relations Act, Lee Goldman

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Article attempts to provide the appropriate constitutional analysis of restrictions on nonpicketing labor publicity. Part II describes the relevant statute and illustrative cases, including the Supreme Court's DeBartolo decision, that have raised but not resolved the first amendment issues concerning nonpicketing labor publicity. The cases focus attention on two restrictions the courts have imposed on nonpicketing labor publicity-the "producer-distributor" and the "for the purpose of" requirements. Part III analyzes the protected status of the nonpicketing labor speech by comparing nonpicketing labor publicity with labor picketing and commercial speech-two areas that bear superficial similarity to nonpicketing labor publicity and that …

Secondary Consumer Picketing, Statutory Interpretation And The First Amendment, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines both the statutory and constitutional implications of Safeco and Tree Fruits. It suggests that the confusion surrounding existing Board and court interpretations of section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) stems from the Supreme Court's failure to assess realistically the impact that consumer picketing has on secondary businesses, as well as the Court's refusal to examine the objectives of unions that resort to secondary picketing.

Perry Education Association V. Perry Local Educators' Association, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Protecting The Free Speech Rights Of Insurgent Teachers' Unions: Evaluating The Constitutionality Of Exclusive Access To School Communications Facilities, Stephen E. Woodbury

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I examines the traditional and limited public forum doctrines designed to guarantee speakers a right of access to public places, and finds these theories inadequate in the school union setting. Part II explores a recent addition to the free speech/equal protection analysis: the content neutrality doctrine. This doctrine mandates that when a school board allows one union to express its viewpoints, a duty is created to provide equivalent access to all unions, absent a compelling state interest. Part III reviews several justifications for limiting non-EBA access, and finds most of them without merit and none of them adequate to …

Free Speech Or Economic Weapon? The Persisting Problem Of Picketing, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

"Peaceful picketing," the United States Supreme Court has said, "is the workingman's means of communication."' One line of analysis is that, as a means of communication, picketing is free speech and is therefore entitled to every constitutional protection afforded other forms of expression. This means that it cannot be subjected to special restrictions, such as antiboycott curbs, simply because it is picketing. The opposing line of analysis is that picketing is not simply speech; it is "speech plus." The "plus" element removes picketing from the realm of pure speech and enables it to be regulated in ways that the Constitution …

Secondary Consumer Picketing: The First Amendment Questions Remain, Curtis L. Mack, Risa L. Lieberwitz

Mercer Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has been faced many times with the question of the constitutionality of governmental restrictions on picketing in light of the first amendment protection of free speech. In these decisions, the Court has applied various approaches and tests in an effort to resolve the tension between governmental interests in controlling picketing and individual rights of expression consistent with the first amendment. The Court has confronted these issues particularly in the area of secondary consumer picketing, which is regulated by section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. These issues surfaced first in 1957 with …

Nlrb Campaign Laboratory Conditions Doctrine And Free Speech Revisited, James W. Wimberly Jr., Martin H. Steckel

Mercer Law Review

The subject of free speech in union organizing campaigns has generated a great deal of discussion and comment over the years. This subject is naturally popular because of the intensity of a union organizing campaign, the importance of the subject to industry and organized labor, the evolution of constitutional and statutory doctrines applicable to free speech, and the shifts in opinion by commentators and the public over how such matters should be handled. This article will make no attempt to summarize or analyze what has already been said on the subject. Instead, this article will examine one aspect of National …

The Threat Or The Announcement Of Plant Closure?, H. Thomas Arthur

Mercer Law Review

The limits on an employer's free speech rights during a union representation campaign were established by the Supreme Court in NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co. But the proper interpretation of Gissel first requires an understanding of the limitations on employers' property rights set out by the Court in Textile Workers Union v. Darlington Manufacturing Co. A proper understanding of Darlington leads to the conclusion that the National Labor Relations Board (Board) and the circuit courts have been incorrectly applying the limits on an employer's first amendment right of free speech. The effect of the misapplication in the context …

Labor Law - Secondary Picketing - Buy Local Campaign At A Netural Business Violates Section 8(B)(4) Of The National Labor Relations Act, W. James Mckay

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law, Various Editors

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Hope For The Functionally Politically Impotent Government Employee--A Hatch Act Reappraisal, James T. Gilbert

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Labor Law--Employer Free Speech--Use Of The Gissel Guidelines In Determining Predictions Or Threats, Douglas Alan Cornelius

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.