First Amendment Commons^™

Tort Law Inside Out, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Faculty Publications

For more than a century, scholars have been looking at tort law from the outside in. Theorists committed to external goals like efficient allocation of resources or moral justice have treated tort as a mere vehicle for the achievement of their policy preferences, rather than as a body of law with a discernible internal purpose. It is time to revisit tort on its own terms.

This Article takes its cue from the New Doctrinalists, who urge that extralegal normative insights from fields such as economics or philosophy aid adjudication only when they are directly tethered to legal concepts; that is, …

On The Categorical Approach To Free Speech – And The Protracted Failure To Delimit The True Threats Exception To The First Amendment, Wayne Batchis

Pace Law Review

On June 1, 2015, the Supreme Court decided Elonis v. United States on statutory rather than constitutional grounds. In doing so, it turned away an important opportunity to provide needed clarification of true threats, a category of expression relegated to a lower level of protection by the Court almost a half-century ago. The categorical approach to free speech made its first explicit appearance in Supreme Court case law in 1942. Since that time, the Court has relied heavily on this method of constitutional interpretation, carving out discrete exceptions from the seemingly absolutist mandate of the First Amendment that Congress make …

Conflict In The Courts: Obscenity Control & First Amendment Freedoms, Father Edward J. Berbysse, S.J.

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

False Commercial Speech And The First Amendment: Understanding The Implications Of The Equivalency Principle, Martin H. Redish, Kyle Voils

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Status Of The Hearer In Mr. Madison’S Neighborhood, Burt Neuborne

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Reverent Reflection Of The Splendid Scholarship Of Martin Redish—Does Reexamining Commercial Speech Shed Light On The Regrettable Reliance Upon Lie & Insult In Political Campaigns?, Douglas W. Kmiec

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction: The Moral Demands Of Commercial Speech, Andrew Koppelman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Are Commercial Speech Cases Ideological? An Empirical Inquiry, Adam M. Samaha, Roy Germano

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The empirical study of judicial behavior continues to grow and mature. The live challenges include specification, such as constructing useful conceptions and measures of ideology, mapping particular domains in which identifiable forces influence decisions, and quantifying the magnitudes of those influences. To make progress on these challenges, we roll out new and expanded datasets that build on the work of Cass Sunstein, Lee Epstein, Gregory Sisk, and others, and we report on the character of constitutional litigation today. Our datasets cover U.S. Court of Appeals decisions in five domains: (1) commercial speech, (2) gun rights, (3) abortion rights, (4) establishment …

Commercial Speech And The Perils Of Parity, Frederick Schauer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Coverage/Protection Distinction In The Law Of Freedom Of Speech—An Essay On Meta-Doctrine In Constitutional Law, Mark Tushnet

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

No Regrets (Almost): After Virginia Board Of Pharmacy, Alan B. Morrison

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Information: Due Process Of The Right To Know, Luis Kutner

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.

A First Amendment Deference Approach To Reforminganti-Bullying Laws, Emily Suski

Louisiana Law Review

The article focuses on the problems of bullying among students and the use of U.S. First Amendment deference approach for reforming anti-bullying laws in the U.S., it also mentions effects of bullying; First Amendment anti-bullying law doctrine on overbreadth; and deferential standards.

Elonis V. United States: Why The Supreme Court Punted On Free Speech, David Barney

Pepperdine Law Review

In Elonis v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2001 (2015), the Supreme Court had a chance to interpret the boundaries of a federal statute forbidding threats transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce and to consider the constitutional implications of regulating such threats. In its statutory analysis, the Court hesitated to declare how the law should be applied, and instead, only provided guidance as to how it should not be. It likewise refrained from any further analysis on constitutional grounds entirely. This contest winning student case note explores the opinion in depth and comments on its potential implications.

Terrorist Speech On Social Media, Alexander Tsesis

Vanderbilt Law Review

The presence of terrorist speech on the internet tests the limits of the First Amendment. Widely available cyber terrorist sermons, instructional videos, blogs, and interactive websites raise complex expressive concerns. On the one hand, statements that support nefarious and even violent movements are constitutionally protected against totalitarian-like repressions of civil liberties. The Supreme Court has erected a bulwark of associational and communicative protections to curtail government from stifling debate through overbroad regulations. On the other hand, the protection of free speech has never been an absolute bar against the regulation of low value expressions, such as calls to violence and …

Doe V. University Of Michigan: Free Speech On Campus 25 Years Later, Len Niehoff

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Critical Look At How Top Colleges Are Adjudicating Sexual Assault, Tamara Rice Lave

University of Miami Law Review

This Article examines the procedural protections afforded by the top American colleges and universities. After briefly situating these policies historically, it presents original research on the procedural protections provided by the top twenty universities, top ten liberal arts colleges, and top five historically black colleges as ranked by U.S. News and World Reports. In 2015, university administrators were contacted and asked a series of questions about the rights afforded to students, including the standard of proof, right to an adjudicatory hearing, right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, right to counsel, right to silence, and right to appeal. This Article describes …

Combatting Institutional Censorship Of College Journalists: The Need For A "Tailored Public Forum" Category To Best Protect Subsidized Student Newspapers, Nicole Comparato

University of Miami Law Review

College journalists are in a unique position. On one hand, they are typical college students, attending classes and cheering on the team at all the big games. On the other, they serve as investigative journalists, revealing the university’s deepest flaws on the front page of their newspaper. These roles should not be mutually exclusive, but at an alarming rate, universities are attempting to rid themselves of bad press by censoring their own campus newspapers.

This Note argues that universities can get away with this because of the current structure of the public forum doctrine. This doctrine determines the extent to …

Triggering Tinker: Student Speech In The Age Of Cyberharassment, Ari Ezra Waldman

University of Miami Law Review

This essay challenges the common assumption that public schools have limited authority to regulate cyberbullying that originates and takes place off campus. That argument presumes a level of myopia, clarity, and literalism in the law that simply does not exist. First, even assuming it existed, a geographic requirement is an outdated creature of a pre-Internet age. Cyberbullying poses unique challenges to young people, educators, and schools not contemplated when the Court decided its student speech cases. Second, I argue that a campus presence requirement for regulating any kind of off-campus cyberspeech never really existed, so any suggestion to the contrary …

Censorship By Crying Wolf: Misclassifying Student Speech As Threats, Susan Kruth

University of Miami Law Review

Freedom of expression is at risk at colleges and universities across the country. While campus administrators employ a number of strategies to censor speech they disfavor, this piece explores the trend of justifying censorship and punishment of expression by labeling it a “threat” and citing concerns about safety. In contrast to the kind of speech the Supreme Court has defined as a “true threat,” the expression at issue in the cases discussed here poses no safety risk, comprising political commentary, jokes, and pop culture references. Its punishment both trivializes actual dangers and chills campus discourse. Accordingly, it is imperative that …

Keynote Address, Justice John Paul Stevens (Ret.)

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Limits Of Education Purpose Limitations, Elana Zeide

University of Miami Law Review

While student privacy has been a public issue for half a century, its contours change in response to social norms, technological capabilities, and political ideologies. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) seeks to prevent inaccurate or inappropriate information about students from being incorporated into pedagogical, academic, and employment decisionmaking. It does so by con- trolling who can access education records and, broadly, for what purposes.

New education technologies take advantage of cloud computing and big data analytics to collect and share an unprecedented amount of information about students in class- rooms. Schools rely on outside, often for-profit, entities …

The Resilience Of Noxious Doctrine: The 2016 Election, The Marketplace Of Ideas, And The Obstinacy Of Bias, Leonard M. Niehoff, Deeva Shah

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

The Supreme Court has recognized the central role that free expression plays in our democratic enterprise. In his dissenting opinion in United States v. Abrams, Justice Holmes offered a theory of how free expression advances our search for truth and our cultivation of an informed electorate. That model—often called the “marketplace of ideas,” based upon the metaphor used by Holmes—has proven to be one of the most persistent and influential concepts in First Amendment jurisprudence.

The marketplace of ideas model essentially holds that free expression serves our democratic goals by allowing differing proposed truths and versions of the facts …

Updating The Social Network: How Outdated And Unclear State Legislation Violates Sex Offenders’ First Amendment Rights, Elizabeth Tolon

Fordham Law Review

Readily available on computers, phones, tablets, or television, social media has become a necessary platform of expression for many. But, for others, social media is an inaccessible tool whose very use has criminal repercussions. To protect innocent children, many states have enacted legislation restricting sex offenders’ access to social media. Unfortunately, this legislation is often outdated, overly restrictive, and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. North Carolina has recently attracted national attention, as its statute highlights the potential constitutional issues states face in drafting such legislation. To avoid the constitutional concerns that North Carolina faces, state legislators must draft statutes narrowly …

Denial Of Harm: Sex Trafficking, Backpage, And Free Speech Absolutism, Jody Raphael

Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence

No abstract provided.

Why You Should Doubt Reports That The First Amendment Would Protect Gen. Flynn From Prosecution Under The Logan Act, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Schools, Speech, And Smartphones: Online Speech And The Evolution Of The Tinker Standard, Aleaha Jones

Duke Law & Technology Review

Under the Supreme Court’s holding in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, public schools may only restrict student speech where the speech is reasonably forecasted to cause a “substantial and material disruption.” With online forums calling into question who may control speech and forecast its impact, the circuit courts have granted public schools broad authority to monitor, and punish, their students for online activity that occurs off-campus. The Supreme Court recently declined the opportunity to reverse this disturbing trend by denying certiorari for Bell v. Itawamba County. As a result, questions remain unanswered regarding students’ right to free …

Commoditized Speech, “Bargain Fairness,” And The First Amendment, Andrew Tutt

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tort Vision For The New Millennium: Strengthening News Industry Standards As A Defense Tool In Law Suits Over Newsgathering Techniques Essay, Micahel W. Richards

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Newsroom: Slate: Goldstein On Travel Ban 02-17-2017, Jared A. Goldstein

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.