First Amendment Commons^™

Locked And Unloaded: The Constitutional And Empirical Case For Firearm Safe Storage Advisories, Hillel Y. Levin, Kay L. Levine

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Constitutional law haunts our efforts to reduce the number of firearm deaths each year. But even with the evolving scope of individual rights, sensible regulation remains possible.

This Article proposes one such regulatory tool. State governments legally can and pragmatically should require firearm sellers to advise their customers of the association between improper gun storage and the risk of accidental death and suicide. Mandatory safe storage advisories implicate two strands of constitutional jurisprudence: the First Amendment’s protection against compelled speech and the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. While the Supreme Court has strengthened both doctrines in recent years, jurisdictions …

Let Them Hear It: Peaceful Protests Near The Homes Of Supreme Court Justices, Srikanth Reddy

Lewis & Clark Law Review

All of us—not just attorneys and politicians—need to be more critical and skeptical of the Supreme Court. Criticism by ordinary people is good and appropriate, even if it hurts the Justices’ feelings. That includes public protests. When a case matters enough to them, members of the public can and should criticize the Court and its Justices, including by peacefully gathering and protesting near a Justice’s home, or when a Justice appears out in the world.

Abandoning Press Freedom, Ronnell Andersen Jones, Sonja R. West

Scholarly Works

Among elected officials and the broader public, attitudes toward the press are deeply polarized along ideological lines. Polling shows that most liberals favor the press, while conservatives view it more negatively— a partisan divide that has widened significantly over the past decade. Conventional wisdom suggests that the same ideological split is also at work at the Supreme Court, with liberal Justices championing the work of the press while their conservative colleagues express more skepticism. This perception is reinforced by historical examples of liberal Justices advancing press rights alongside broader democracy-engagement and social-justice issues. Recent calls from some conservative Justices to …

Something Concrete: How Labor Advocates Can Best Respond To The Ambiguity Of Glacier Northwest, Ateş Serifsoy

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s much-anticipated decision in Glacier North-west, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local No. 174 (Glacier) marked a critical moment for workers’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the longstanding practice of Garmon preemption. Yet, initial fears of a significant rollback of workers’ rights, driven by sensational headlines, were met with an unexpectedly narrow Court opinion. This Comment examines Glacier’s implications for Gar-mon preemption and the right to strike. It offers the historical background of the doctrine of labor law preemption before Glacier; presents a detailed analysis of Glacier itself, including its …

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.

"Fighting Words" And The First Amendment In Maine: State V. John W., Deborah J. Ross

Maine Law Review

On April 1, 1979, John W. was driving his car, accompanied by his sister Maria. The car was stopped by a police officer who requested John's license and registration. Maria asked the officer why they had been stopped. When the officer remained silent, Maria became abusive and was arrested for disorderly conduct. John demanded to know what was going on. Ordered to get back into his car, John began shouting at the police: "Hey, turn around and come back here;" "Hey, you fucking pig, you fuckin' kangaroo;" "Fuck you." John was arrested and convicted in a juvenile proceeding of disorderly …

The Limits Of Tradition: Counterman, True Threats, And The Categorical Approach To Free Speech, Brett Zicari

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

Tradition is in vogue.[1] Across a wide variety of areas, the Supreme Court has embraced “history and tradition” as its primary methodology for determining the meaning of constitutional provisions.[2] Recently the Court has even suggested that a restriction on the use of names in trademarks could rest entirely on its traditional status,[3] but nowhere has this move toward tradition been as robust or longstanding as in the speech context. Since the 1940s, the Supreme Court has invoked tradition to defend content-based or categorical restrictions, and more recently, it has purported to rely exclusively on tradition.[4] The …

Constitutional Law Application In The Sport Industry, Barbara Osborne

Marquette Sports Law Review

No abstract provided.

Religious Beliefs, Unemployment Benefits, And Constitutional Choices: Flynn V. Maine Employment Security Commission, Mary Ann Lynch

Maine Law Review

The last decade has seen a growing number of individuals adopt fundamentalist, "born-again" Christianity. For these people, religion requires more than observance of a sabbath, weekly services, or financial commitment. Fundamentalist religion often requires its adherents to spread their religious beliefs with missionary zeal. Religion may be a constant preoccupation and as such, is brought into the work place. Thus, there is potential for conflict between the needs and demands of employers and the exercise of one's religion. While the free exercise clause of the first amendment may not always provide protection for employees against employers' requirements, it nevertheless serves …

Regulating Social Media Through Family Law, Katharine B. Silbaugh, Adi Caplan-Bricker

Faculty Scholarship

Social media afflicts minors with depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, addiction, suicidality, and eating disorders. States are legislating at a breakneck pace to protect children. Courts strike down every attempt to intervene on First Amendment grounds. This Article clears a path through this stalemate by leveraging two underappreciated frameworks: the latent regulatory power of parental authority arising out of family law, and a hidden family law within First Amendment jurisprudence. These two projects yield novel insights. First, the recent cases offer a dangerous understanding of the First Amendment, one that should not survive the family law reasoning we provide. First Amendment jurisprudence …

The Long Shadow Of Food Lion, Knight First Amend. Inst. (May 31, 2024), Alan K. Chen

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This essay discusses the continuing shadow of Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., which looms over the efforts of journalists and, increasingly of other citizens, to engage in undercover investigations to discover and disseminate truthful information on matters of profound public concern. At a time when many impediments to freedom of the press have emerged, legal barriers to undercover investigations suppress a key newsgathering tool that was once an important part of the news media ecosystem. After describing the extensive litigation battle in the case, the essay argues that the decision continues to cast a chilling effect over journalists …

Constitutional Rights And Retrenchment: The Elusive Promise Of Equal Citizenship, Deborah L. Brake

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Who Is A Minister? Originalist Deference Expands The Ministerial Exception, Jared C. Huber

Notre Dame Law Review

The ministerial exception is a doctrine born out of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment that shields many religious institutions’ employment decisions from review. While the ministerial exception does not extend to all employment decisions by, or employees of, religious institutions, it does confer broad—and absolute—protection. While less controversy surrounds whether the Constitution shields religious institutions’ employment decisions to at least some extent, much more debate surrounds the exception’s scope, and perhaps most critically, which employees fall under it. In other words, who is a "minister" for purposes of the ministerial exception?

Searching For Truth That Speaks To Power: Free Speech And Equality On Campus, Stephen M. Feldman

American University Law Review

University campuses are being rent apart in disputes pitting free expression against equality [read: diversity, equity, and inclusion]. Yet scholarly discussions and university declarations widely agree: While universities should encourage an inclusive educational environment, free-speech principles prohibit universities from restricting or punishing hate speech, group libel, and other forms of offensive expression. This Article argues that this prioritizing of free speech over equality on campus is mistaken. Equality should often be favored over free expression in campus settings. Although Supreme Court precedents are ambiguous, one can reasonably argue that the doctrine allows universities to restrict and punish offensive expression, including …

The Volokh Briefs: Drawing The Line Against Compelled Speech In Public Accommodations, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In a series of important amicus briefs (the “Volokh Briefs”) filed over the course of about a decade, Professor Eugene Volokh was the principal architect of an argument for protecting expressive goods and services offered for sale the commercial marketplace.  This free speech protection would override certain applications of state antidiscrimination law.

The argument bore fruit in 303 Creative v. Elenis (2023), which held that under the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause the state could not force a designer to fashion websites incorporating the designer’s customized text and graphics for the celebration of same-sex weddings. As Volokh and others urged, …

The Repeal Of Religious Accommodations -- A Constitutional Analysis, Ronald J. Colombo

American University Law Review

Under modern Supreme Court jurisprudence, the First Amendment ordinarily imposes no heightened standard of review upon neutral laws of general applicability that coincidentally burden the free exercise of religion. To relieve or minimize this burden, however, lawmakers are generally free to promulgate exemptions from, or accommodations to, such laws for the benefit of religious adherents. Such accommodations are common.

When a law is not neutral with respect to religion, or when the law is not generally applicable, then it will be subject to the exacting test of strict scrutiny to the extent that it burdens the free exercise of religion. …

First Amendment Disequilibrium, Christina Koningisor, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky

UF Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court has constructed key parts of First Amendment law around two underlying assumptions. The first is that the press is a powerful actor capable of obtaining government information and checking government power. The second is that the executive branch is bound by various internal and external constraints that limit its ability to keep information secret. Judges and legislators have long assumed that these twin forces—an emboldened press and a constrained executive—maintain a rough balance between the press’s desire to uncover secrets and the executive’s desire to keep information hidden. Landmark First Amendment cases such as the Pentagon Papers …

Committed To Copyright's Constitutional Role, Michael W. Carroll

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Who is Pam Samuelson? She is many things to many people: scholar, teacher, mentor, leader, advocate, and friend, to name a few. One could easily add “force of nature” to the list. This Article suggests adding the term “loyalist” to argue that an important through-line in Pam’s work has been an unwavering commitment to understanding and promoting copyright law’s ability to serve its purpose in our constitutional order.

Inactive Exercise & Unequal Protection: Espinoza & Carson Under The Equal Protection Clause, Griffith B. Bludworth

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Education, The First Amendment, And The Constitution, Erwin Chemerinsky

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

School Matters, Ronna Greff Schneider

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

(E)Racing Speech In School, Francesca L. Procaccini

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Speech on race and racism in our nation’s public schools is under attack for partisan gain. The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment teaches a lot about the wisdom and legality of laws that chill such speech in the classroom. But more importantly, a First Amendment analysis of these laws reveals profound insights about the health and meaning of our free speech doctrine.

Through a First Amendment analysis of “anti-critical race theory” laws, this essay illuminates the first principles of free speech law. Specifically, it shows that the First Amendment offers little refuge to teachers or parents looking to …

Foreword: New Supreme Court Cases: Duquesne Law Faculty Explains, Wilson Huhn

Law Faculty Publications

On September 30, 2022, several members of the faculty of the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University presented a Continuing Legal Education program, New Supreme Court Cases: Duquesne Law Faculty Explains, reviewing these developments. Duquesne Law Review graciously invited the faculty panel to contribute their analysis of these cases from the Supreme Court's 2021- 2022 term for inclusion in this symposium issue of the Law Review.

The Censorship Constraint And Rulemaker State Action: Are Section 230'S Immunity Provisions Unconstitutional Content-Based Regulations?, Scot A. Reader

West Virginia Law Review

Even casual watchers of T.V. crime dramas understand the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule. Under this rule, evidence obtained by the police in a search of a criminal suspect’s premises that exceeds the scope of a judicial warrant is almost always inadmissible in the suspect’s criminal trial. The rule is designed to deter unreasonable governmental intrusion into private affairs and applies without regard for the suspect’s guilt or innocence. This Article proposes that the First Amendment includes an analogous rule against governmental censorship. Under this rule, content-based speech regulations exceed the legislature’s speech rulemaking warrant and are almost always invalid. This …

The Disembodied First Amendment, Nathan Cortez, William M. Sage

Faculty Scholarship

First Amendment doctrine is becoming disembodied—increasingly detached from human speakers and listeners. Corporations claim that their speech rights limit government regulation of everything from product labeling to marketing to ordinary business licensing. Courts extend protections to commercial speech that ordinarily extended only to core political and religious speech. And now, we are told, automated information generated for cryptocurrencies, robocalling, and social media bots are also protected speech under the Constitution. Where does it end? It begins, no doubt, with corporate and commercial speech. We show, however, that heightened protection for corporate and commercial speech is built on several “artifices” - …

Raising The Threshold For Trademark Infringement To Protect Free Expression, Christine Haight Farley, Lisa P. Ramsey

American University Law Review

The First Amendment right to free speech limits the scope of rights in trademark law. Congress and the courts have devised various defenses and common law doctrines to ensure that protected speech is exempted from trademark infringement liability. These defensive trademark doctrines, however, are narrow and often vary by jurisdiction. One current example is the speechprotective test first articulated by the Second Circuit in Rogers v. Grimaldi, expanded by the Ninth Circuit, and recently restricted by the Supreme Court in Jack Daniel’s Properties v. VIP Products to uses of another’s mark within an expressive work that do not designate the …

Reconsidering The Public Square, Helen L. Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Autonomy And Disciplinarity: Can Pseudoprofessional Speakers Select Their Own Constitutional Categorization?, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Investigative Deception Across Social Contexts, 22-14 Knight First Amend. Inst. (Dec. 16, 2022), Alan K. Chen

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This essay explores investigative deceptions, intentional lies used to gather information that is in the public interest, across different areas of law. In some contexts, such falsehoods are viewed as producing great social benefits. For example, civil rights laws embrace intentional lies by testers to smoke out discriminatory conduct. Under federal labor law, union 'salts' are allowed to hide their identity and acquire jobs with employers whose workers they wish to organize. In most cases, law enforcement officers may engage in elaborate subterfuges when operating 'stings' and interrogating witnesses. In these contexts, the law permits a person to lie in …

The First Amendment And Online Access To Information About Abortion: The Constitutional And Technological Problems With Censorship, John Villasenor

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

To what extent could an abortion-restrictive state impede access to online information about abortion? After Dobbs, this question is no longer theoretical. This essay engages with this issue from both a legal and technological perspective, analyzing First Amendment jurisprudence as well as the technological implications of state-level online censorship. It concludes that the weight of Supreme Court precedent indicates that state attempts to censor information regarding out-of-state abortion services would violate the First Amendment. That said, the essay also recognizes that as Dobbs itself upended precedent, it is unclear what Supreme Court would do when ruling on questions regarding …