First Amendment Commons^™

United States Response To Questionnaire: Alai Congress 2026 - Copyright And Free Expression In The Age Of Algorithms, Philippa Loengard

Kernochan Center for Law, Media, and the Arts

ALAI-USA is the U.S. branch of ALAI (Association Littèraire et Artistique Internationale). ALAI-USA was started in the 1980's by the late Professor Melville B. Nimmer, and was later expanded by Professor John M. Kernochan.

Taxing The Architecture: A Structural Remedy For Disinformation In The Algorithmic Marketplace, Padmakshi Sharma

LL.M. Essays & Theses

This paper argues that the constitutional assumption that truth will prevail over falsehood in the marketplace of ideas has always depended on three structural preconditions. These conditions were: distributive parity for counter-speech, institutional segmentation of the information environment, and epistemic credibility signals that allowed non-expert audiences to distinguish authoritative from non-authoritative sources. Together, these conditions ensured that truth was granted a structural advantage sufficient to offset the harms of falsehood. Social media platforms have destroyed all of these conditions. The destruction is a consequence of an economic model organized around behavioral advertising and engagement maximization, which systematically amplifies disinformation over …

For Whose Benefit Is The Freedom Of Speech?, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

In United States v. Alvarez, the US Supreme Court ruled that an official of a water district who introduced himself to his constituents by falsely stating in a public meeting that he had earned the Congressional Medal of Honor had a First Amendment right to make that demonstrably untrue claim. Audience members misled by the statement might well be considered to have a First Amendment interest in not being directly and knowingly lied to in that way. Other members of the community might be thought to have a First Amendment interest in public officials such as Xavier Alvarez telling …

The Equal Right To Exclude: Religious Speech And The Road To 303 Creative Llc V. Elenis, Kate Redburn

Faculty Scholarship

This Article explains how speech became the constitutional vehicle for the right to discriminate on religious grounds in places of public accommodation. It argues that cause lawyers for the New Christian Right cobbled together a right to exclude from a surprising doctrinal source: the egalitarian tendencies within the First Amendment. Using extensive original archival research, case materials, and little-known accounts of key figures, I reconstruct the New Christian Right’s legal strategy to obtain speech coverage for service denial. By strategically co-opting the progressive free speech legacy, innovative lawyers in the religious wing of the conservative legal movement convinced liberal jurists …

Speaking Collectively: The First Amendment, The Public Sector, And The Right To Bargain And Strike, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

How is it that the Supreme Court has not understood collective bargaining and strikes among public sector workers to fall within the First Amendment’s ambit? Public sector union activity involves expression, assembly, association, and petitioning. Workers’ ability to form unions and to engage in concerted action in support of their shared goals is an important part of democratic governance. Through unions, workers engage in active citizenship; through association with one another, they express their views collectively and engage the government and the public on issues of public concern. Indeed, in the context of protecting the putative speech rights of union …

Is John Stuart Mill's On Liberty Obsolete?, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

In On Liberty, published in 1859, John Stuart Mill argues for the “absolute” protection of the “liberty of thought and discussion.” Ever the empiricist, he maintains that such uncompromised freedom, not for all communication or self-expression but for the subset of those activities that qualifies as thought and discussion, would generate the best overall consequences for societies such as Great Britain and the United States. The advent of digital technology has altered how thought and discussion is generated, distributed, and received in ways that might problematize some of the empirical assumptions upon which Mill's argument in On Liberty is …

Opening Dialogue, Lee C. Bollinger, Geoffrey R. Stone

Faculty Scholarship

To set the stage for the excellent essays that make up this volume on the future of free speech, let’s begin where we often do when thinking together about the First Amendment: with some basic facts and fundamental observations about the constitutional command that “Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

Of course, in the United States, “free speech” is not only part of the constitutional Bill of Rights; it is also a cultural and social norm by which we choose to live. Several of the essays in this volume therefore take …

Government Counterspeech, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

We are awash in lies. Misinformation has always been with us, but the endemicity of social media and the depth of political polarization in the United States and elsewhere has enabled falsehoods to be amplified, monetized, microtargeted, and spread around the world at unprecedented speed and scale. The consequences for democracy, public health, and social harmony are emergent and grave.

Misinformation presents one of the most vexing challenges for content moderation on social media (and off it, such as on cable news) for myriad reasons. Because misinformation can be difficult or controversial to define, policing it risks chilling core political …

Courting Censorship, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Has Supreme Court doctrine invited censorship? Not deliberately, of course. Still, it must be asked whether current doctrine has courted censorship — in the same way one might speak of it courting disaster.

The Court has repeatedly declared its devotion to the freedom of speech, so the suggestion that its doctrines have failed to block censorship may seem surprising. The Court’s precedents, however, have left room for government suppression, even to the point of seeming to legitimize it.

This Article is especially critical of the state action doctrine best known from Blum v. Yaretsky. That doctrine mistakenly elevates coercion …

Columbia Law Experts Submit Two Briefs To Supreme Court In Free Speech/Lgb Rights Case, Law, Rights, And Religion Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Columbia Law School faculty and policy teams submitted amicus briefs to the Supreme Court on Friday in 303 Creative v. Elenis, a case the Court will decide next term.

Education Is Speech: Parental Free Speech In Education, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

Education is speech. This simple point is profoundly important. Yet it rarely gets attention in the First Amendment and education scholarship.

Among the implications are those for public schools. All the states require parents to educate their minor children and at the same time offer parents educational support in the form of state schooling. States thereby press parents to take government educational speech in place of their own. Under both the federal and state speech guarantees, states cannot pressure parents, either directly or through conditions, to give up their own educational speech, let alone substitute state educational speech. This abridges …

The Classic Arguments For Free Speech 1644-1927, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter examines the classic arguments for freedom of speech. It traces the first comprehensive argument for freedom of speech as a limiting principle of government to John Milton’s Areopagitica, a polemic against censorship by a requirement of prior licensing in which Milton develops an argument for the pursuit of truth through exposure to false and heretical ideas rather than the passive reception of orthodoxy. Despite Milton’s belief in the advancement of understanding through free inquiry, he was far from liberal in the modern sense of that term and he did not, for instance, extend the tolerance he advocated to …

Panel One: Classification And Access To National Security Information, Mary-Rose Papandrea, Margaret Kwoka, David Pozen, Stephen I. Vladeck

Faculty Scholarship

This article is a transcript of the first panel of First Amendment Law Review’s 2021 Symposium on National Security, Whistleblowers, and the First Amendment, discussing classification and access to national security information.

Legal Scholars & Theologians Partner On An Ambitious Vision For Religious Liberty, Elizabeth Reiner Platt

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

Oct. 6, 2020—To safeguard the right to religious freedom, the next presidential administration must end the hyper-surveillance of Muslims, welcome religious refugees, protect land sacred to Native communities, restore church-state separation, and withdraw policies that favor particular religious beliefs, argues a new report co-authored by the Law, Rights, and Religion Project at Columbia University (LRRP) and Auburn Seminary.

Federal Court Allows Civil Rights Lawsuit Challenging Violations At Standing Rock, Columbia Center For Contemporary Critical Thought

Columbia Center for Contemporary Critical Thought

New York, September 3, 2020 — In a significant victory for critics of governmental overreach, Judge Daniel M. Traynor (U.S. District Court for North Dakota) denied motions to dismiss filed by state and county law enforcement defendants and the private security firm, TigerSwan LLC. As a result, the Thunderhawk v. County of Morton civil rights lawsuit, brought by plaintiffs Cissy Thunderhawk, Wašté Win Young, the Reverend John Floberg, and José Zhagñay against North Dakota government officials and TigerSwan, will move forward on the claim that the plaintiffs and the class were denied their constitutional rights to Free Speech.

Why A Data Disclosure Law Is (Likely) Unconstitutional, Max I. Fiest

Kernochan Center for Law, Media, and the Arts

Social media platforms have changed the very structure of communication. These platforms exert significant influence over how we get our news, how we form and join political movements, and how we connect with friends and family. But social media platforms are black boxes. Moderation algorithms are opaque--even to the platforms themselves — and attempts by third parties to research these algorithms are often frustrated. Because platforms withhold data necessary for public interest research, Congress might step in and mandate data access for certain researchers and journalists. I conclude that any such effort would (likely) be unconstitutional under the First Amendment. …

Fixing America's Founding, Maeve Glass

Faculty Scholarship

The forty-fifth presidency of the United States has sent lawyers reaching once more for the Founders’ dictionaries and legal treatises. In courtrooms, law schools, and media outlets across the country, the original meanings of the words etched into the U.S. Constitution in 1787 have become the staging ground for debates ranging from the power of a president to trademark his name in China to the rights of a legal permanent resident facing deportation. And yet, in this age when big data promises to solve potential challenges of interpretation and judges have for the most part agreed that original meaning should …

Disinformation In The Marketplace Of Ideas, Tim Wu

Faculty Scholarship

It was just one line, nearly a throwaway; technically a subordinate clause. Yet that one clause from Oliver Wendell Holmes’s Abrams dissent breathed life into a metaphor, the “marketplace of ideas,” whose lasting power is undeniable. Nor is it difficult to understand why. Yes, it may be incomplete, inaccurate, and possibly cribbed from John Stuart Mill, but the metaphor matches something we all see. Ideas and ideological programs are out there looking for adherents or “buyers.” In Holmes’s time, progressives, socialists, and fascists courted supporters, just as similar groups do now. Specific ideas like the flat tax or the legalization …

Holmes's Understanding Of His Clear-And-Present-Danger Test: Why Exactly Did He Require Imminence?, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

For all the suggestiveness and staying power of his market-in-ideas metaphor, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s most significant influence on First Amendment law has turned out to be his notion that only imminent harm can justify punishment for expressions of opinion. This emphasis on the time dimension in the calculus of harm is now entrenched in modern doctrine. It is easy to imagine how First Amendment law might have developed differently had Holmes’s peculiar focus on imminence not been a factor in shaping how the freedom of speech has come to be understood in the United States.

Antitrust & Corruption: Overruling Noerr, Tim Wu

Faculty Scholarship

We live in a time when concerns about influence over the American political process by powerful private interests have reached an apogee, both on the left and the right. Among the laws originally intended to fight excessive private influence over republican institutions were the antitrust laws, whose sponsors were concerned not just with monopoly, but also its influence over legislatures and politicians. While no one would claim that the antitrust laws were meant to be comprehensive anti-corruption laws, there can be little question that they were passed with concerns about the political influence of powerful firms and industry cartels.

Since …

Speech And Exercise By Private Individuals And Organizations, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

A central issue about redundancy concerns how far the exercise of religion is simply a form of speech that is, and should be, constitutionally protected only to the extent that reaches speech generally. Insofar as a constitutional analysis leaves flexibility, we have questions about wise legislative choices. To consider these issues carefully, we need to have a sense of what counts as relevant speech and the exercise of religion. That is the focus of this article.

It addresses the basic categorization of what counts as “speech” for freedom of speech and what counts as religious exercise when each is engaged …

Janus's Two Faces, Kate Andrias

Faculty Scholarship

In ancient Roman religion and myth, Janus is the god of beginnings, transitions, and endings. He is often depicted as having two faces, one looking to the future and one to the past. The Supreme Court’s Janus v AFSCME case of last Term is fittingly named.Stunning in its disregard of principles of stare decisis, Janus overruled the forty-year-old precedent Abood v Detroit Board of Education.The Janus decision marks the end of the post – New Deal compromise with respect to public sector unions and the First Amendment. Looking to the future, Janus lays the groundwork for further attack on …

A Skeptical View Of Information Fiduciaries, Lina M. Khan, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

The concept of “information fiduciaries” has surged to the forefront of debates on online-platform regulation. Developed by Professor Jack Balkin, the concept is meant to rebalance the relationship between ordinary individuals and the digital companies that accumulate, analyze, and sell their personal data for profit. Just as the law imposes special duties of care, confidentiality, and loyalty on doctors, lawyers, and accountants vis-à-vis their patients and clients, Balkin argues, so too should it impose special duties on corporations such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter vis-à-vis their end users. Over the past several years, this argument has garnered remarkably broad support …

Constitutional Moral Hazard And Campus Speech, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

One underappreciated cost of constitutional rights enforcement is moral hazard. In economics, moral hazard refers to the increased propensity of insured individuals to engage in costly behavior. This Essay concerns what I call “constitutional moral hazard,” defined as the use of constitutional rights (or their conspicuous absence) to shield potentially destructive behavior from moral or pragmatic assessment. What I have in mind here is not simply the risk that people will make poor decisions when they have a right to do so, but that people may, at times, make poor decisions because they have a right. Moral hazard is not …

“First Amendment Defense Act” (Fada) Is Reintroduced In The Senate, Public Rights/Private Conscience Project

Center for Gender & Sexuality Law

New York, March 8, 2018–The Public Rights/Private Conscience Project is dismayed that the deceptively named “First Amendment Defense Act” (FADA) was reintroduced into the U.S. Senate today by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and 21 Republican co-sponsors, including Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Ted Cruz (Texas) and Orrin Hatch (Utah). Not only is this bill unnecessary to the protection of religious liberty in the United States, its language would be harmful to the constitutional rights of millions of Americans.

A Reader’S Guide To John Milton’S Areopagitica, The Foundational Essay Of The First Amendment Tradition, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

Fittingly, the most imaginative and densely suggestive of the classic arguments for free speech was written by a poet. Had his career unfolded as he wished, John Milton would never have produced his renowned Areopagitica of 1644. It was only with great reluctance that he undertook to engage in prose polemics during the English Civil War, sacrificing his “calm and pleasing solitariness” to “embark in a troubled sea of noises and hoarse disputes.” He described pamphleteering as something he did “with the left hand” all the while “knowing myself inferior to myself.” Posterity, always a Miltonic concern, has begged to …

Learned Hand's Seven Other Ideas About The Freedom Of Speech, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

I say “other” because, regarding the freedom of speech, Learned Hand has suffered the not uncommon fate of having his best ideas either drowned out or credited exclusively to others due to the excessive attention that has been bestowed on one of his lesser ideas. Sitting as a district judge in the case of Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten, Hand wrote the earliest judicial opinion about the freedom of speech that has attained canonical status. He ruled that under the recently passed Espionage Act of 1917, writings critical of government cannot be grounds for imposing criminal punishment or the …

Rights Skepticism And Majority Rule At The Birth Of The Modern First Amendment, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

Learned Hand, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and Louis Brandeis all had the same problem. They were troubled — Holmes less than the others and later, but eventually — by the widespread and mean-spirited persecution of dissenters they observed as the United States entered World War I and then reacted to the Bolshevik Revolution. Today, most persons so troubled would think that constitutional rights, and particularly the freedom of speech, exist for the very purpose of countermanding zealous political majorities that deny or neglect the claims of dissenters. But Hand, Holmes, and Brandeis, each by his own distinctive path, came to the …

Hate Speech At Home And Abroad, Sarah H. Cleveland

Faculty Scholarship

The United States’ best-known constitutional protection internationally is surely the First Amendment. Around the world, the United States is perceived as protecting freedom of expression and the press first and foremost, among all rights. And whether admired for its purity and idealism or dismissed as naïve and sui generis, the United States’ approach to free speech is globally examined, critiqued, and debated. It is the United States’ most prominent constitutional export, informing the drafting of foreign constitutions, statutes, and judicial interpretations, and undergirding the protection for freedom of expression in the international and regional human rights systems.

This chapter …

The Supreme Court, Judicial Elections, And Dark Money, Richard Briffault

Faculty Scholarship

Judges, even when popularly elected, are not representatives; they are not agents for their voters, nor should they take voter preferences into account in adjudicating cases. However, popularly elected judges are representatives for some election law purposes. Unlike other elected officials, judges are not politicians. But judges are policy-makers. Judicial elections are subject to the same constitutional doctrines that govern voting on legislators, executives, and ballot propositions. Except when they are not. The same First Amendment doctrine that protects campaign speech in legislative, executive, and ballot proposition elections applies to campaign speech in judicial elections – but not in quite …