First Amendment Commons^™

Vaccines, Religious Liberty, And The Gvr As Doctrinal Signal, Zalman Rothschild

Articles

This Essay proceeds in four Parts. Part I traces the doctrinal baseline, showing that vaccines have long functioned as the limit case for religious liberty. Part II briefly describes the doctrinal changes of the COVID-19 era — the Supreme Court’s expansion of religious equality doctrine, and its emergency-docket denials that left vaccine mandates formally unresolved — before explaining why the GVR in Miller signals a different move: the extension of the religious liberty framework to vaccine mandates, bypassing the comparability analysis that had allowed most courts to sustain them under the equality model. Part III turns to Miller itself and …

From Waiver To Shield: The Routine Misapplication Of The Federal Tort Claims Act’S Discretionary Function Exception, Alexander Sitnikov

Cardozo Law Review

When a pedestrian trips and falls on a defective sidewalk, liability usually turns on negligence. But when the property surrounding the sidewalk belongs to the federal government, tort liability often vanishes altogether. This result is just one of the many shortcomings of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and one of its most controversial and heavily litigated provisions: the discretionary function exception (“DFE”). This Note explores the current judicial interpretations of the FTCA and DFE, which often work in conjunction with state laws and federal regulations. Despite the central public policy rationale and congressional intent surrounding the FTCA and its …

Complicit Nullification: The Illegitimate (Abrogation) Of School Religious Liberty Precedent, Amanda Harmon Cooley

Cardozo Law Review

Louisiana has enacted legislation that mandates the display of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom. This statutory mandate directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s extant precedent in Stone v. Graham. Legislators in Texas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Kentucky have also indicated plans to introduce similar unconstitutional legislation, defying the Supreme Court’s interpretations of the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses. Similarly, Texas and Florida now permit public school chaplains or Bible-based public school curricula, which violates the Court’s longstanding prohibitions on such actions, as established in its 1948 ruling in Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education …

Testimony Of Professor Zalman Rothschild Before The House Subcommittee On Early Childhood, Elementary, And Secondary Education Regarding Mahmoud V. Taylor, Zalman Rothschild

Testimony

On February 10, 2026, Professor Zalman Rothschild, Horn Family Distinguished Research Scholar in Law and Religion at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, testified before the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education of the House Committee on Education and Workforce. His testimony addressed the Supreme Court’s decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor and its implications for parental rights, religious liberty, public education, vaccination mandates, and compulsory schooling.

Professor Rothschild situates Mahmoud within the broader constitutional tradition shaped by Pierce v. Society of Sisters, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, and Wisconsin v. Yoder …

Seeing Is Believing? Deepfakes In Financial Markets, Hadar Y. Jabotinsky, Michal Lavi

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

An AI-powered tool recently mimicked Warren Buffett's image and voice so convincingly that even his own family could have been deceived. This striking example highlights the transformative potential of voice cloning and deepfakes. This innovative technology leverages artificial intelligence (AI) to create hyper-realistic audio and video content. By blurring the boundaries between authenticity and synthetic creation, deepfakes make it possible to fabricate moments that never occurred. Recent advancements in AI and user-friendly software have made deepfakes more accessible andfurther contributed to the proliferation of deepfakes, enabling even individuals with minimal technical skills to produce compelling deepfakes at little to no …

Youtube Journalists And The Future Of The Fourth Estate: The Fine Line Between Journalism And Entertainment, Stephan Toljan

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note argues that the legal distinction between professional journalists and social media actors has blurred due to the universal accessibility of public digital platforms. It proposes eliminating the requirement of institutional affiliation for the reporter's privilege, suggesting instead that any individual who satisfies the Von Bulow factors regarding the intent to disseminate information to the public should be eligible for the privilege.

The First Amendment & Censorship: Is This A New Era?, Cardozo Center For Rights And Justice, David Rudenstine, Olivier Sylvain

2025 Event Invitations

Professors David Rudenstine (Cardozo) and Olivier Sylvain (Fordham) will discuss censorship both historically and today, and the role that the First Amendment plays in limiting government suppression of speech. Professor Alex Reinert will moderate the discussion.

Can The Free Speech Clause Protect Transgender Expression From The Trump Administration?, Daniel Cooper

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

This Article explores how the Free Speech Clause can provide protection to speakers implicated by the Trump administration's executive orders restricting gender-related speech. Part I will provide an overview of how the Trump administration has directed executive authority to stifle gender-non-conforming identity and expression, how those efforts fit within the larger context of right-wing efforts to marginalize transgender people, and why the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is not currently a useful tool for the protection of trans rights. Part II will examine efforts to regulate government employees' pronoun usage, focusing on whether …

The Resurgence Of The Rap Act: Why Industry Professionals Enthusiastically Support This Bill, Ansley Henderson

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal (AELJ) Blog

Artists release music and write songs to create art, not to offer any sort of criminal confession. Yet, dating back to a 1996 criminal trial involving Snoop Dogg, artists’ lyrics have been admissible as evidence in criminal and civil trials. Most recently, rapper Young Thug, was accused of being the head of a violent gang based solely on lyrics from his songs as evidence. His case sparked nationwide controversy regarding the constitutionality of his lyrics being admitted as key evidence at trial. The rapper’s popular music collective known as “Young Stoner Life,” was posited by prosecutors to actually be a …

Brief Of Amici Curiae 775 Law Professors In Support Of Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment And Declaratory And Permanent Injunctive Relief, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Haiyun Damon-Feng, Rebecca Ingber, Rachel Landy, Jacob Noti-Victor, Alexander A. Reinert, Anthony J. Sebok

Amicus Briefs

Amicus curiae brief submitted by 775 law professors in support of Susman Godfrey LLP's motion for summary judgment and request for declaratory and permanent injunctive relief in Susman Godfrey LLP v. Executive Office of the President. The brief argues that Executive Order 14263 unlawfully targets a law firm based on its clients, advocacy, and litigation activities, in violation of the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and Sixth Amendment. The amici contend that the order constitutes impermissible viewpoint discrimination, interferes with the right to counsel, and threatens the independence of the legal profession and the rule of law.

Brief Of Amici Curiae 676 Law Professors In Support Of Plaintiff’S Motion For Summary Judgment And For Declaratory And Permanent Injunctive Relief, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Rebecca Ingber, Rachel Landy, Jacob Noti-Victor, Alexander A. Reinert

Amicus Briefs

Amici 676 law professors submit this brief in support of Plaintiff Jenner & Block’s Motion for Summary Judgment and for Declaratory and Permanent Injunctive Relief (the “Motion”) to emphasize the threat that the President’s Executive Order (the “Order”) presents to the independence and integrity of the legal profession, the rights of clients to seek redress in the courts, and, by extension, the rule of law. As experts in constitutional law, legal ethics, and the history of the legal profession, among other fields, we have a significant interest in ensuring that the principles of free speech, freedom of association, the right …

The Problem Of Biased Precedents, Ronen Avraham, Issachar Rosen-Zvi

Cardozo Law Review

This Article addresses the problem ofbiased precedents, wherein sophisticated repeat players, often corporate and state entities armed with superior resources and a vested interest in shaping the law, manipulate legal proceedings to systematically establish self-advantageous precedents. Specifically, by strategically choosing to litigate cases they anticipate will lead to favorable precedents and settling those expected to produce unfavorable outcomes, these players systematically bias the law over time to their advantage, at the expense of one-shot parties and society at large. The problem of biased precedents challenges the commonly held view about the efficiency and fairness of the legal system and raises …

The Doors Of Janus: A Critical Analysis Of The Socio-Technical Forces Eroding Trust In The Rule Of Law, Anuj Puri, Esther Keymolen

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The Rule of Law is neither just a principle nor solely the institutions that embody that principle, a critical aspect of the Rule of Law is its grounding in trust which often gets neglected in the surrounding discourse. When the citizens' trust in the Rule of Law weakens, the Rule of Law becomes fragile. In this article we examine the impact of emerging technologies on the citizens' trust in the Rule of Law. Our analysis is specifcally focused on the effect of systemic disinformation which is likely to worsen with the advent of Generative AI, algorithmic misgovernance, and the digitalization …

Shoot The Messenger: Why Section 230 Does Not Shield Suggestive Content Delivery, Alexander Heinkele

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Internet companies have frequently relied on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 to avoid liability for third-party content hosted on their platforms. However, over time, companies began to take advantage of the broad cover of Section 230 in circumstances outside the statute’s original scope. This Note advocates for a more nuanced interpretation of the statute as it applies to suggestive algorithms and offers a proposal for amending Section 230 to better reflect the modern digital landscape.

The Impossibility Of Religious Equality, Zalman Rothschild

Articles

The Supreme Court has recently adopted a new rule of religious equality: Laws unconstitutionally discriminate against religion when they deny religious exemptions but provide secular exemptions that undermine the law’s interests to the same degree as would a religious exemption. All the Justices and a cadre of scholars have agreed in principle with this approach to religious equality. This Essay argues that this new rule of religious equality is inherently unworkable, in part because it turns on treating that which is religious the same as its secular “comparators.” But religion is not comparable to anything neither in terms of its …

The Future Of “History And Tradition”: The First Amendment Implications Of Bruen, Floersheimer Center For Constitutional Democracy

2024 Event Invitations

Did SCOTUS turn all lower court judges into armchair historians? Could landmark free speech precedents like New York Times Co. v. Sullivan be at risk? How will the Court address modern questions like social media content moderation?

“Swifties” Or Swift Suppression? How Police Officers Exploit Copyright Law And Practice Online To Evade Public Accountability, Jeremy Lamstein

Cardozo Law Review

The video recording of the tragic killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers had an immediate and profound impact on the public. The video held essential evidentiary value in the prosecution of Floyd’s killers, as it told a very different story than what the police officers had made the situation out to be. It was by no means the first recording of police misconduct that generated significant attention from the public, but it remains among the most notable.

Now, imagine that the world had never seen the extent of this horrific incident. In this alternate universe, the video never …

Jack Daniel's And The Unfulfilled Promise Of Trademark Use, Stacey Dogan, Jessica Silbey

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Jack Daniel's v. VIP Products and its implications for the use of trademarks in artistic and expressive works. The Court's ruling established a "trademark use" doctrine, distinguishing between uses of trademarks as a designation of source for goods and non-trademark, expressive uses. While the decision does not overturn the Rogers v. Grimaldi test, it creates uncertainty in applying Rogers to expressive works, leading to inconsistent lower court decisions and threatening First Amendment protections for creative uses of trademarks.

Squatters Squabbles: The Use Of Mediation To Provide Beneficial Solutions To Adverse Possession Claims In New Jersey, Bayla Zohn

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

In our society, law is a complex and ever-evolving field, constantly adapting to fit our needs. Yet, there are certain legal matters we would expect to have clear and obvious resolutions. Property ownership should be simple and unambiguous, governed by "established legal rules and precepts." Examine a deed, survey the stated legal owner of the tract of land, and your answer should be uncomplicated. Yet, there are a multitude of complex laws that allow individuals to obtain legal ownership of land in a seemingly illicit fashion.

Keynote Address: Adjudicating Art, Amy Adler

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The keynote address critiques the Supreme Court's decision in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith for its flawed approach to interpreting the meaning of art in copyright law, particularly in the context of fair use. It argues that courts are ill-equipped to determine the meaning of art, as art often resists reduction to discrete messages or meanings. The Court's reliance on visual analysis and its failure to provide clear guidance on how to assess meaning exacerbate these problems, leading to confusion in lower courts and potentially stifling artistic expression.

Satire And Actual Malice: Expanding The Reasonable Reader Analysis For The Modem Era, Cory Crystal

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

What Happens When The Conflicts Of Interest Board Does Not Prevent Conflicts? Examining New York City Charter Chapter 68, Abigail Damsky

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note critiques the New York Board's advisory opinion on elected officials' use of personal social media accounts, arguing that it contravenes Chapter 68 and Board Rule Section 113 by allowing the use of city resources for political gain, undermining government integrity, and creating transparency issues under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). The analysis advocates for revising the advisory opinion to align with existing ethical standards and ensure accountability.

Panel 1: Copyright Law, Michael W. Carroll, Peter Karol, Christopher Sprigman, Jacob Noti-Victor

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The Warhol v. Goldsmith case has reshaped the interpretation of fair use in copyright law, emphasizing market competition and the commercial purpose of the use. The Supreme Court's decision focused on the commercial licensing of Warhol's work, highlighting the importance of assessing whether the use competes with the original work's market. This shift could influence future cases, particularly in technology and art, by potentially altering how transformative use and market competition are evaluated.

Panel 2: Trademark Law, Stacey Dogan, Christine Haight Farley, Jessica Silbey, Rebecca Tushnet, Felix Wu

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Why Courts Should Not Interpret The Meaning Of Art, Amy Adler

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article argues that courts are ill-equipped to interpret the meaning of art, particularly in fair use cases, as seen in the Supreme Court's decision in Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith. The Court's reliance on determining the meaning of art exacerbates confusion and inconsistency in fair use jurisprudence, highlighting the need for alternative approaches that avoid judicial interpretation of artistic meaning.

Trademark Fair Use Is No Joke, Christine Haight Farley

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article critiques the Supreme Court's decision in Jack Daniel's Properties v. VIP Products, arguing that the Court missed an opportunity to clarify the relationship between trademark law and the First Amendment. While the Court acknowledged the importance of protecting parodies, it failed to develop a comprehensive framework for balancing trademark rights with free speech. Instead, it introduced a narrow rule that limits the application of the Rogers test, potentially undermining speech protections in trademark disputes. The article contends that the Court's reliance on the likelihood of confusion test is insufficient to address the broader First Amendment implications of …

Professional Norms At A Crossroads: Farhane And Its Implications For Legal Counsel, Hayley Sandoval

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

This Note examines the right to effective assistance of counsel during guilty pleas through the lens of the pending Second Circuit case Farhane v. United States. This case will have significant implications for the right to effective legal representation, particularly in terms of defense attorneys’ duty to warn clients of the potential risk of denaturalization as a consequence of pleading guilty. In May 2024, the court reheard Farhane en banc and will issue a decision later this year. If this opinion aligns with the court’s initial decision, it will severely limit the rights of all defendants in criminal proceedings in …

Applying Militant Democracy To Defend Against Social Media Harms, Neil Netanel

Cardozo Law Review

Social media inflict multiple harms on liberal democracy. Online platforms thrive on propagating emotionally inflammatory content that maximizes user engagement. Too often that entails amplifying disinformation, hate speech, online extremism, and deep-seated partisan animosity. Tellingly, as documented in testimony before the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack, in the weeks following the 2020 presidential election, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit knowingly enabled a firestorm of vitriolic far-right election denial on their platforms. In so doing, a Select Committee staff report concludes, the platforms “helped to facilitate the attack on January 6th.”

No Bullying Allowed Here: Adopting A Misuse Doctrine To Defeat Trademark Bullies, Jessica Shechtman

Cardozo Law Review

In order to maintain trademark rights, trademark owners are encouraged to enforce and police their trademarks through civil actions. Enforcing trademark rights is encouraged and incentivized by the Lanham Act because failure to do so may result in harsh consequences for trademark owners. Some of these consequences include weakening of strength or abandonment of the mark, which may result in loss of trademark rights. However, large companies go above and beyond to police and protect their trademarks. At times, this overenforcement is unethical and crosses a fine line between following the law and abusing the law, causing a number of …

Navigating Campaign Finance Reform Through Publicly Funded Elections On The Local Level, Emily Bernstein

Cardozo Law Review

Despite the Constitution’s silence on the issue of campaign finance, the Supreme Court has had a considerable hand in shaping the campaign finance regulatory structure of the United States. There are countless criticisms of the campaign finance system the Court has constructed. On the one hand, some scholars stipulate that, though they are critical of the system, it is an intelligible “product” of the Constitution. On the other hand, others argue that the “vision of democracy” portrayed in money-in-politics decisions is not faithful to the Constitution.