First Amendment Commons^™

Judicial Underreach: Tiktok Inc. V. Garland'S Implications For National Security And Free Speech, Olivia Sharp

Colorado Law Student Scholars

No abstract provided.

The Domestic Mirror: Tiktok V. Garland, Data Privacy, And Meaningful Free Expression, Olivia Sharp

Colorado Law Student Scholars

No abstract provided.

Moody V. Netchoice And Telecom Law's First Amendment, Blake Reid

Publications

No abstract provided.

Jawbreaking And Counterboning, Blake Reid

Publications

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr’s public campaign of unlawful threats against television broadcasters, culminating in the high-profile preemption and later return to air of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, provides an important natural experiment for the law of jawboning. The Kimmel-Carr episode highlights the challenges of legal remedies against government officials over even the most flagrantly coercive, unlawful, and public jawbones. It also highlights the importance of intermediaries refusing to comply with unlawful demands—what this Essay calls jawbreaking.

Using the Kimmel-Carr episode as a case study, this Essay proposes moving beyond voluntary incentives for jawbreaking to impose a mandatory duty to jawbreak …

Fear And Free Speech, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Undercover Investigations, Deception, And Democracy, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

How The Antidiscrimination Law Of Commercial Transactions Really Works, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

From Gods To Google, Rebecca Aviel, Margot Kaminski, Toni M. Massaro, Andrew Keane Woods

Publications

The First Amendment has become a significant barrier to sensible technology regulation. The conventional explanation for this is the Court's deregulatory turn in free-speech law. But the Lochnerization story is incomplete. The Court's profound solicitude for religious speakers plays a central role in the current digital-free-expression landscape. By protecting the speech of certain religious dissidents, the Court has created a set of constitutional entitlements that logically extend to technology firms. Along the way, the Court has eroded its ability to apply the First Amendment sensibly to novel technologies.

This Feature draws the doctrinal through line from gods to Google. We …

Contesting "Address": Conflicts Over The Words We Use To Address And Refer To Each Other, Helen Norton

Publications

Professor Richard Brooks's generative insights provide us with valuable tools for recognizing, and trying to make sense of, address's role in human interactions. That "address"--the words we use to address and refer to each other--has the potential both to offer value and to inflict harm to these interactions sometimes triggers conflict over appropriate forms of address. In this Commentary to Professor Brooks's Frankel Lecture, I examine some of these conflicts.

As we'll see, some address conflicts involve debates over whether and when address actually makes meaning or whether it’s instead relatively trivial--while others involve contestants who agree that address makes …

Securitizing The University, Maryam Jamshidi

Publications

Since October 7, 2023, public and private actors have doubled down on efforts to securitize the American university. In large part, these initiatives aim to quash a vocal pro-Palestine movement that has become highly visible across U.S. campuses since October 7th. In targeting this group, these efforts have variously treated the university as an "object" of national security, namely, as a potential site of national security risk, while simultaneously encouraging or pressuring universities to "participate" in national security, namely, by actively and, in many cases, voluntarily furthering U.S. national security objectives. The university's status as object of and participant in …

Suspicion, Deference, And The First Amendment, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Creative Jurisprudence: The Paradox Of Free Speech Absolutism, R. George Wright, Chris Rowley

University of Colorado Law Review Forum

Governments often seek to restrict speech on the basis of its content, navigating the ever-complex terrain between constitutional freedoms and regulatory interests. While the United States judiciary has historically endeavored to balance competing constitutional questions and government interests when scrutinizing content-based speech regulations, recent trends signify a troubling shift. The judiciary has recently embraced what this Article refers to as free speech absolutism, whereby it sidesteps the longstanding, intricate process of balancing constitutional values and public interests, in favor of an unequivocal endorsement of speech rights. This simplified judicial strategy proceeds first with an acknowledgment of the paramount importance of …

Constructing Ai Speech, Margot E. Kaminski, Meg Leta Jones

Publications

Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems such as ChatGPT can now produce convincingly human speech, at scale. It is tempting to ask whether such AI-generated content “disrupts” the law. That, we claim, is the wrong question. It characterizes the law as inherently reactive, rather than proactive, and fails to reveal how what may look like “disruption” in one area of the law is business as usual in another. We challenge the prevailing notion that technology inherently disrupts law, proposing instead that law and technology co-construct each other in a dynamic interplay reflective of societal priorities and political power. This Essay instead deploys …

Section 230'S Debts, Blake Reid

Publications

Much attention has been paid to the unknown First Amendment permissibility of the government regulating social media platforms' carriage practices. The Supreme Court's impending resolution of the NetChoice cases poses a high-stakes First Amendment question: "Can the government permissibly dictate what types of content platforms publish?"

But how did the First Amendment stakes in NetChoice get so high? This Article identifies a long-standing gap in the Supreme Court's First Amendment jurisprudence for platform regulation following its decision in Reno v. ACLU. This Article attributes that gap to the accumulation of both interpretive and legislative debts by Section 230 of the …

Machine Manipulation: Why An Ai Editor Does Not Serve First Amendment Values, Alec Peters

University of Colorado Law Review

The past few years have seen increasing calls for regulation of large social media platforms, and several states have recently enacted laws regulating their content moderation, promotion, and recommendation practices. But if those platforms are exercising editorial discretion when carrying out these tasks, many of the regulations will run into constitutional concerns: the First Amendment protects the “exercise of editorial control and judgment” by publishers over their choice of content and how it is presented. However, the editorial operation of social media platforms differs significantly from traditional media, most importantly in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for editorial decision-making. …

Uncommon Carriage, Blake Reid

Publications

As states have begun regulating the carriage of speech by “Big Tech” internet platforms, scholars, advocates, and policymakers have increasingly focused their attention on the law of common carriage. Legislators have invoked common carriage to defend social media regulations against First Amendment challenges, making arguments set to take center stage in the Supreme Court’s impending consideration of the NetChoice saga.

This Article challenges the coherence of common carriage as a field and its utility for assessing the constitutionality and policy wisdom of internet regulation. Evaluating the post-Civil War history of common carriage regimes in telecommunications law, this Article illustrates that …

Risky Speech Systems: Tort Liability For Ai-Generated Illegal Speech, Margot E. Kaminski

Publications

No abstract provided.

Solidifying Students' Right To Gender Expression, Scott Skinner-Thompson

Publications

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Church And Law: The Ministerial Exception In Demkovich V. St. Andrew The Apostle Parish, Jonathan Murray

University of Colorado Law Review

Religious freedom is increasingly invoked to defeat liability for behavior that has long been regulated under accepted, neutral law, an argument to which many courts and judges appear receptive. One such area of law seeing this activity is the ministerial exception-a judicial principle recognized under the First Amendment. The ministerial exception guarantees religious organizations' discretion in how they select their "ministers,"or religious employees dedicated to the organization's religious mission. However, current law lacks clarity regarding the application of the exception to an organization's treatment of its ministers. Recently, the Seventh Circuit, sitting en banc, chose to categorically expand the application …

Getting To Trustworthiness (But Not Necessarily To Trust), Helen L. Norton

Publications

As ethicist and political scientist Russell Hardin observed, our willingness to trust an actor generally turns on our own experience with, and thus our own perceptions of, that actor’s motives and that actor’s competence. Changes over time and technology can alter our experience with a particular actor and thus our willingness to trust or distrust that actor.

This symposium essay focuses not on how to encourage the public to trust the media, but instead on how the media’ can behave in trustworthy ways--in other words, how its choices can demonstrate its trustworthy motives and competence. Examples include refusing to amplify …

What Twenty-First-Century Free Speech Law Means For Securities Regulation, Helen Norton

Publications

Securities law has long regulated securities-related speech--and until recently, it did so with little, if any, First Amendment controversy. Yet the antiregulatory turn in the Supreme Court's twenty-first-century Free Speech Clause doctrine has inspired corporate speakers' increasingly successful efforts to resist regulation in a variety of settings, settings that now include securities law. This doctrinal turn empowers courts, if they so choose, to dismantle the securities regulation framework in place since the Great Depression. At stake are not only recent governmental proposals to require companies to disclose accurate information about their vulnerabilities to climate change and other emerging risks, but …

Reconsidering The Public Square, Helen L. Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Distrust, Negative First Amendment Theory, And The Regulation Of Lies, Helen Norton

Publications

This symposium essay explores the relationship between “negative” First Amendment theory—rooted in distrust of the government’s potential for regulatory abuse—and the government’s regulation of lies. Negative First Amendment theory explains why many lies are protected from governmental regulation—even when the regulation neither punishes nor chills valuable speech (as was the case, for example, of the statute at issue in United States v. Alvarez). But negative theory, like any theory, also needs limiting principles that explain when the government’s regulation is constitutionally justifiable.

In my view, we engage in the principled application of negative theory when we invoke it in (the …

A Framework For Thinking About The Government’S Speech And The Constitution, Helen Norton

Publications

This Essay sketches a framework for mapping and navigating the constitutional implications of the government’s speech—and then illustrates this framework’s application to some contemporary constitutional disputes. My hope is that this framework will help us sort through the constitutional puzzles triggered by the government’s expressive choices—puzzles that confront courts and policymakers with increasing frequency. What I call “first-stage government speech questions” require us to determine when the government is speaking itself and when it is instead (or also) regulating others’ speech. This determination matters because the rules that apply to the government as speaker are very different from those that …

Manipulation And The First Amendment, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Press’S Responsibilities As A First Amendment Institution, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Free Speech And Democracy: A Primer For Twenty-First Century Reformers, Toni M. Massaro, Helen Norton

Publications

Left unfettered, the twenty-first-century speech environment threatens to undermine critical pieces of the democratic project. Speech operates today in ways unimaginable not only to the First Amendment’s eighteenth-century writers but also to its twentieth-century champions. Key among these changes is that speech is cheaper and more abundant than ever before, and can be exploited — by both government and powerful private actors alike — as a tool for controlling others’ speech and frustrating meaningful public discourse and democratic outcomes.

The Court’s longstanding First Amendment doctrine rests on a model of how speech works that is no longer accurate. This invites …

How The Supreme Court Talks About The Press (And Why We Should Care), Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Transformative Silence And Protest, Deborah J. Cantrell

Publications

Social movement protests have become common place in the last several years. Images come easily to mind of protestors marching down streets holding signs and chanting. Just as easily, images come to mind of counter-protestors yelling back, and law enforcement engaging protestors, often trying to control them with notable force. This Article recognizes that protestors often engage with speech, silence and the law in very pragmatic, but important ways. How does a locality handle permitting for protests? Are there noise restrictions to know about? How likely will it be that law enforcement will be present and making arrests? If there …

The Fourth Amendment’S Forgotten Free-Speech Dimensions, Aya Gruber

Publications

No abstract provided.