First Amendment Commons^™

The Difficulty Of Balancing The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint With The Right Of Privacy, Bridgette Nunez

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prohibition Of Indoctrination In Education — A Look At The Cse Law Of The European Court Of Human Rights, Fernando Méndez Powell

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Speech In Schools And The Right To Participation: When The First Amendment Encounters The Convention On The Rights Of The Child, Lotem Perry-Hazan

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Mergens V. Westside Community Schools At Twenty-Five And Christian Legal Society V. Martinez: From Live And Let Live To My Way Or The Highway?, Charles J. Russo

Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Real-Time Sports Data And The First Amendment, Ryan M. Rodenberg, John T. Holden, Asa D. Brown

Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts

Technological advancements have created an emergent challenge for organizations attempting to monetize real-time information. Real-time data as a commodity is especially relevant in the sports industry. Sports leagues increasingly seek to control the dissemination of real-time data in conjunction with lucrative distribution agreements. We analyze the legal status of real-time sports data under both intellectual property law and the First Amendment, with our case-by-case analysis extending to spectators, gamblers, journalists, and non-gambling entrepreneurs. Although we conclude that the First Amendment protections are broad across all four categories, particularly when the underlying sporting event takes place on public land, we find …

Side Effects: State Anti-Fraud Statutes, Off-Label Marketing, And The Solvable Challenge Of Causation, Isaac D. Buck

Cardozo Law Review

While the American public remains preoccupied with the lurching implementation of the Affordable Care Act, the regulation of pharmaceutical companies for their off-label marketing and promotion of drugs features a regulatory environment within the health industry that seems to be in wild flux. Following the Second Circuit's decision in United States v. Caronia, commentators and providers are unsure about the future of federal regulation in this area, with the FDA seeking to minimize the opinion and pharmaceutical companies celebrating its impact. Much of the understandably spirited reaction to the Caronia case has omitted a discussion of the relevant and …

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa

Akron Law Review

“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz

Akron Law Review

"The decision of Metpath, Inc. v. Imperato is indicative of the growing trend of the judiciary toward affording "commercial speech" the protective shield of the first amendment. As shown by Metpath, where the concern is advertising by a medical clinic, speech with commercial overtones is afforded protection where a public interest in the subject and content of the speech is demonstrated. However, the perimeters of such protection have not been defined by this or previous decisions."

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand

Akron Law Review

"Although United States history is replete with struggles over the rights and prerogatives of the press, until recently these disputes rarely made their way to the nation's highest court.' In the last several years the Supreme Court has been confronted with a number of important, complex questions dealing with the role of a free press in a free society.'"

First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation, James E. Moliterno

Akron Law Review

“ ‘I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss L words and the words you can't say . . .the words you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves... the ones that will curve your spine [and] grow hair on your hands ....’ While this is the satiric opinion of George Carlin, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a bare majority of the United States Supreme Court have embraced it as their genuine opinion.' They have decided to protect the public from the fate of hearing Carlin's social criticism regarding seven ‘dirty’ words.”

The Supreme Court And The Press: Freedom Or Privilege?, Sandra Bradley

Akron Law Review

This comment will examine the Supreme Court's spring, 1978 decisions as they affected first amendment rights, and will assess their impact upon the press. Particular emphasis will be placed on Zurcher v. Stanford Daily as it affects first amendment, as well as fourth amendment, protections.

Unwanted Publicity, The News Media, And The Constitution: Where Privacy Rights Compete With The First Amendment, Ernest D. Giglio

Akron Law Review

It is ironic that while recent legal history records the emergence of a constitutional right to privacy, the Supreme Court, in a line of cases from New York Times to Firestone, has restricted the common law tort of privacy. The legal issues are particularly complex and admittedly difficult to reconcile when the public disclosure tort comes in conflict with first amendment privileges. Expansion of the privacy tort need not necessarily impose an unreasonable burden on the news media, provided the Supreme Court distinguishes between defamation and privacy invasion and establishes and applies to the latter wrong its own legal principles.

Obscenity Law In Ohio, Richard H. Harris

Akron Law Review

Ohio's new obscenity statutes enacted in 1972 and made effective on January 1, 1974 are interesting to examine in light of recent Supreme Court holdings. The changes made in Ohio's obscenity statutes over the years reflect the Supreme Court's guidelines in varying degrees. Before looking at some of these recent statutes, as well as the present one in effect today, it is necessary to review the major Supreme Court decisions which have set these guidelines.

First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Erosion Of New York Times Co. V. Sullivan; Herbert V. Lando, Edward Howlett

Akron Law Review

In Herbert v. Lando the Supreme Court announced that the first amendment does not require a constitutional privilege foreclosing direct inquiry into the editorial process. While the decision may seem correct in its overturning of the absolute privilege afforded to the editorial process by the Second Circuit, nevertheless, by refusing to grant even a qualified privilege to the editorial process the Court may have upset the delicate balance between an individual's interest in his reputation and society's interest in a free flow of information recognized in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

Conscientious Objection And The First Amendment, Gail White Sweeney

Akron Law Review

This comment will examine the possible constitutional consequences of the three other probabilities. 1) that Congress will revive the previous C.O. exemption without amendment; 2) that Congress will amend the statute to narrow the exemption; and, 3) that Congress will eliminate the C.O. exemption altogether. An analysis of earlier statutes is necessary to this end.

Federal Communications Commission, Administrative Law, Cbs, Inc. V. F.C.C., Rochelle K. Seide

Akron Law Review

The broadcast media has an obligation to permit a legally qualified candidate for federal office to purchase reasonable amounts of time on behalf of his candidacy. In so holding, the Supreme Court went beyond a mere codification of the public interest standard. Pursuant to section 312(a)(7) of the Communication Act of 1934, as amended, candidates for federal office have an affirmative right of reasonable access to the broadcast media. In addition, the Court found that the statutory right of access provided by section 312(a)(7), as defined and applied by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), was not violative of the first …

Affirmative Action, Reverse Discrimination Bratton V. City Of Detroit, John T. Dellick

Akron Law Review

In Bratton v. City of Detroit, the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals examined charges of reverse discrimination' arising from a voluntary affirmative action plan adopted by the City of Detroit. These reverse discrimination claims were presented as alleged violations of Title VIP and the fourteenth amendment. The Bratton court reviewed the leading Title VII reverse discrimination case, United Steelworkers of America v. Weber, and the leading fourteenth amendment reverse discrimination case, Regents of University of California v. Bakke. From these cases, the court in Bratton extracted the major guidelines of each, comingled them, and developed …

Book Removal In Secondary Schools: A Violation Of The First Amendment? Board Of Education V. Pico, Cherlyn Pherigo

Akron Law Review

In the American democratic system, it is not uncommon for small, publicly-elected bodies to control the workings of societal institutions. These bodies may be federal, state or local in realm and function, and are usually given wide discretion. But who is it that controls the actions of these bodies This question is paramount to the myriad of recent cases involving the removal of books from secondary school libraries. The body involved is the local school board - an elected unit charged with the duty of managing school affairs. In that process of management, however, local school boards are apparently not …

Richmond Newspapers And The First Amendment Right Of Access, George W. Kelly

Akron Law Review

This paper argues that the Court's reasoning in Richmond provides a basis for a first amendment right to governmental information. Just as openness benefits the trial process, it further enhances the operation of government. To the extent that history justifies trial access, it also provides support for open information. As the Supreme Court has yet to decide the exact nature of the public's right of access to trials, this paper makes no effort to define precisely the extent of the right to information. It simply assumes that enough similarities exists between the two allowing a valid comparison. And it suggests …

School Board Authority And First Amendment Rights: The View After Board Of Education, Island Trees V. Pico, Joseph D. Mccann

Akron Law Review

This analysis will begin with an examination of the historical bases for the state's educational authority and the traditional limitations placed on this authority by the courts. Next, the genesis of students' rights will be reviewed along with the restrictions the growth of these rights has imposed upon school board authority. The paper will then turn to the Pico case itself - surveying the various judicial approaches taken in balancing the interests of school board authority and students' rights and scrutinizing these approaches for the proper theoretical framework for student first amendment rights analysis. Finally, the paper will examine the …

Keeping Pace: The U.S. Supreme Court And Evolving Technology, Brian Thomas

Politics Summer Fellows

Contemporary mainstream discussions of the Supreme Court are often qualified with the warning that the nine justices are out of touch with everyday American life, especially when it comes to the newest and most popular technologies. For instance, during oral argument for City of Ontario v. Quon, a 2010 case that dealt with sexting on government-issued devices, Chief Justice John Roberts famously asked what the difference was “between email and a pager,” and Justice Antonin Scalia wondered if the “spicy little conversations” held via text message could be printed and distributed. While these comments have garnered a great deal of …

Mathew Fraser Sheds His Consititutional Rights To Freedom Of Speech At The Schoolhouse Gates, Karrie M. Kalai

Akron Law Review

The Constitution does not bestow an "unbridled license giving immunity for every possible use of language." The first amendment is not the guardian of unregulated talkativeness. Accordingly, the state's power to control the conduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults, and the well-being of children is one subject entirely within the state's constitutional power to regulate. While children clearly have some first amendment rights, these rights differ in important respects from the rights enjoyed by adults. As the Supreme Court noted, "the world of children is not strictly part of the adult realm of free …

Freedom Of Speech And The Problem Of The Lawful Harmful Public Reaction: Adult Use Cases Of Renton And Mini Theatres, Charles H. Clarke

Akron Law Review

The constitutional right of freedom of speech protects the speech of adult erotic entertainment. The state, consequently, can not suppress such speech unless it is obscene. This constitutional protection helped to turn adult erotic entertainment into one of the nation's growth industries.

The constitutionally protected speech of adult erotic entertainment includes explicit sex films, nude dancing and erotic books. Various adult land uses sprung up to satisfy an apparent large public demand for this entertainment. Adult film theaters, of course, show filmed reproductions of live sex on a big screen. Some taverns offer nude dancing. Some adult bookstores sell more …

The Free Exercise Of Religion, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

Freedom of speech and of the press, guaranteed by the First Amendment, is today regarded to be our most preferred freedom. Justice Cardozo once said this freedom is the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other freedom.

But, to the Founding Fathers, freedom of religion was regarded to be preeminent among fundamental rights. And for good reasons. The immediate forebearers of the Framers of the Constitution, emigrated primarily because they were denied the right freely to exercise their respective religious beliefs not sanctioned by the established Church of England. The Colonists were religious dissenters. They adamantly insisted upon their …

The Edward's Decision: The End Of Creationism In Our Public Schools?, Juliana S. Moore

Akron Law Review

Although many previous cases addressing this issue have gained national attention perhaps no other issue since the famous Scope's "monkey trial" has raised as much controversy as Louisiana's adoption of the "Creationism Act." Now, one thing is certain; when Susie's dad asks her what she learned in school today, she most certainly won't reply that she learned about creationism in science class. The Supreme Court's recent ruling' has insured that the separation between church and state in our public schools will remain. This casenote attempts to examine that ruling, its relationship to similar cases and its impact in the future …

A Line Drawn By Unsteady Hands: Section 170, Charitable Contributions, And Return Benefits In Hernandez V. C.I.R., David M. Phipps

Akron Law Review

This Note analyzes the majority decision and dissenting opinion in Hernandez, which have far-reaching implications for charitable organizations, taxpayers, and the government. Traditional tax deductions for charitable organizations may be in danger and these organizations may suffer economic difficulty?

Bad News: Privacy Ruling To Increase Press Litigation, The Florida Star V. B.J.F., Mary Ellen Hockwalt

Akron Law Review

This note analyzes the history and precedent upon which the Court relied in reaching Florida Star's "harsh outcome." Next, the note discusses how the Court, by refusing to extend its holding beyond the facts of the case and give broad Constitutional protection to publications of truth, failed to provide lower courts with any guidance in deciding future invasion of privacy actions. Finally, the note examines the Court's balancing test: weighing the privacy interests of a crime victim against the newspaper's freedom to print truthful information.

Of Flags And Menorahs: The Power Of Individual And Governmental Symbolic Speech, Mark F. Kohler

Akron Law Review

The aim of this article will be to explore the nature of symbolic speech, both individual and governmental. Using Johnson and Allegheny County as a backdrop, four themes will emerge from the article. First, both individuals and government speak and speak powerfully through symbols and symbolic conduct. Second, medium-based regulation of individual speech should receive careful judicial scrutiny. Third, unlike individual symbolic expression, governmental symbolic speech is subject to substantial content-based restrictions. Finally, careful distinctions must be drawn between government-initiated symbolic speech and governmental endorsement of individual symbolic speech.

Political Campaign Advertising And The First Amendment: A Structural-Functional Analysis Of Proposed Reform, Rebecca Arbogast

Akron Law Review

The metaphor of the political arena as a marketplace has become all too apt with candidates' increased reliance on 30- and 60-second spot television advertisements produced by consulting firms. This shift in the nature of political discourse as well as the accompanying scramble to raise the money necessary to fund this uniquely expensive form of campaign speech has generated much discontent with the electoral process among politicians and commentators. For instance, the Senate established a sixmember commission to propose reforms regarding media coverage of political campaigns, and the Markle Foundation has funded a study on "the potential role of public …

Kuhlmeier V. Hazelwood School District: The First Amendment Rights Of Public High School Students, Edward S. Muse

Akron Law Review

In Kuhlmeier v. Hazelwood School District, the Supreme Court held that high school students' first amendment rights were not violated when their principal deleted articles from the school newspaper. The Court stated that the school newspaper was not a "public forum" for expression which normally receives full first amendment protection. The Court further held that the school principal did not violate students' first amendment rights when he restricted the printing of articles due to the effect that they could have on other students.

The Supreme Court's decision will undoubtedly curtail students' rights to free speech and press. This casenote …