First Amendment Commons^™

Facebook V. Sullivan: Public Figures And Newsworthiness In Online Speech, Thomas E. Kadri, Kate Klonick

Faculty Publications

In the United States, there are now two systems to adjudicate disputes about harmful speech. The first is older and more established: the legal system in which judges apply constitutional law to limit tort claims alleging injuries caused by speech. The second is newer and less familiar: the content-moderation system in which platforms like Facebook implement the rules that govern online speech. These platforms are not bound by the First Amendment. But, as it turns out, they rely on many of the tools used by courts to resolve tensions between regulating harmful speech and preserving free expression—particularly the entangled concepts …

Facebook V. Sullivan: Public Figures And Newsworthiness In Online Speech, Thomas E. Kadri, Kate Klonick

Scholarly Works

In the United States, there are now two systems to adjudicate disputes about harmful speech. The first is older and more established: the legal system in which judges apply constitutional law to limit tort claims alleging injuries caused by speech. The second is newer and less familiar: the content-moderation system in which platforms like Facebook implement the rules that govern online speech. These platforms are not bound by the First Amendment. But, as it turns out, they rely on many of the tools used by courts to resolve tensions between regulating harmful speech and preserving free expression—particularly the entangled concepts …

Rwu First Amendment Blog: David A. Logan's Blog: Infowars Goes To War With The First Amendment 08-15-2018, David A. Logan

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Rwu First Amendment Blog: David Logan's Blog: Discovering Trump 06-22-2018, David A. Logan

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Group Defamation, Power, And A New Test For Determining Plaintiff Eligibility, Jeffrey Greenwood

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

In the fall of 2014, Rolling Stone Magazine published an article describing the rape of a woman at a University of Virginia fraternity house. The story turned out to be false, and members of the fraternity sued for defamation. The suit raises an interesting question: under what circumstances may anonymous individual members of the fraternity recover? This Note describes the case, related common and constitutional law, as well as differences in group defamation doctrine across jurisdictions. After detailing problems with the existing paradigm, the Note proposes a new method for performing the analysis.

Say What You Want: How Unfettered Freedom Of Speech On The Internet Creates No Recourse For Those Victimized, Wes Gerrie

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

In today’s society, virtually everyone relies on online posts in order to make decisions—from what products to purchase to what restaurants to visit. The introduction and increase of online communication has made posting reviews online a simpler, easier, and more efficient process. However, the increase of online communication has threatened the delicate balance between free speech and harmful speech.

A tangled web of recent case law and federal law exists which aggressively protects the free speech of online reviewers. The law has carved out immunity for the website operators that host an online reviewer’s comments, which in turn makes an …

Defamation Per Se And Transgender Status: When Macro-Level Value Judgments About Equality Trump Micro-Level Reputational Injury, Clay Calvert, Ashton T. Hampton, Austin Vining

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article uses the September 2017 defamation decision in Simmons v. American Media, Inc. as a springboard for examining defamatory meaning and reputational injury. Specifically, it focuses on cases in which judges acknowledge that plaintiffs have suffered reputational harm yet rule for defendants because promoting the cultural value of equality weighs against redress. In Simmons, a normative, axiological judgment--that the law should neither sanction nor ratify prejudicial views about transgender individuals-- prevailed at the trial court level over a celebrity's ability to recover for alleged reputational harm. Simmons sits at a dangerous intersection: a crossroads where a noble judicial desire …

Defamation And Privacy In The Social Media Age: What Would Justice Brennan Think?, Stephen Wermiel

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

No abstract provided.

Barnett Vs. Corson. Libel—Truth Of Statement As A Defence—Malice—Act Of Apr. 11, 1901, Construed

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

No abstract provided.

Cyberspace…The Final Frontier: How The Communications Decency Act Allows Entrepreneurs To Boldly Go Where No Blog Has Gone Before, Aaron Jackson

Oklahoma Journal of Law and Technology

No abstract provided.

Trending Now: The Role Of Defamation Law In Remedying Harm From Social Media Backlash, Cory Batza

Pepperdine Law Review

Defamatory comments on social media have become commonplace. When the online community is outraged by some event, social media users often flood the Internet with hateful and false comments about the alleged perpetrator, feeling empowered by their numbers and anonymity. This wave of false and harmful information about an individual’s reputation has caused many individuals to lose their jobs and suffer severe emotional trauma. This Comment explores whether the target of social media backlash can bring a successful defamation claim against the users who have destroyed their reputations on and offline. Notably, one of the biggest hurdles these plaintiffs will …

Freedom Of Speech And The Criminal Law, Dan T. Coenen

Scholarly Works

Because the Free Speech Clause limits government power to enact penal statutes, it has a close relationship to American criminal law. This Article explores that relationship at a time when a fast-growing “decriminalization movement” has taken hold across the nation. At the heart of the Article is the idea that free speech law has developed in ways that have positioned the Supreme Court to use that law to impose significant new limits on the criminalization of speech. More particularly, this article claims that the Court has developed three distinct decision-making strategies for decriminalizing speech based on constitutional principles. The first …

Celebrities’ Expansive “Right Of Publicity” Infringes Upon Advertisers’ First Amendment Rights, Jon Siderits

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Millennials, Equity, And The Rule Of Law: 2014 National Lawyers Convention, How First Amendment Procedures Protect First Amendment Substance, Erik S. Jaffe, Aaron H. Caplan, Robert A. Destro, Todd P. Graves, Alan B. Morrison, Eugene Volokh, David R. Stras

Catholic University Law Review

A panel, at the National Lawyers Convention, discussed procedure as it relates to First Amendment rights. The panel set forth how First Amendment procedures have historically protected First Amendment substance and discussed modern applications of the issue. For example, the prior restraint doctrine, overbreadth doctrine, the allocation of the burden of proof and relaxation of ripeness rules have important implications for challenging restrictions on speech and defending against libel and defamation.

The interaction of free speech and due process is often seen in litigation involving civil harassment orders, or civil protection orders. In many jurisidictions the definition of harassment permits …

Milkovich V. Lorain Journal Twenty-Five Years Later: The Slow, Quiet, And Troubled Demise Of Liar Libel, Leonard Niehoff, Ashley Messenger

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., the Supreme Court held that there is no separate constitutional protection for statements of opinion. It also held that an accusation that an individual lied is a statement of fact actionable in defamation. Lower courts have, correctly in our view, essentially ignored both holdings. In Part I we discuss Milkovich and the infirmities in its reasoning. In Part II we discuss the complex nature of lies and accusations of lies and argue that Milkovich failed to account for that complexity. In Part III we discuss the strategies the lower courts have used to …

Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act: The True Culprit Of Internet Defamation, Heather Saint

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

This Note highlights the growing concern of Internet defamation and the lack of viable legal remedies available to its victims. Internet defamation is internet speech with the purpose to disparage another’s reputation. At common law, a victim of alleged defamation has the right to file suit against not only the original speaker of the defamatory statements, but the person or entity to give that statement further publication as well. In certain cases even the distributor, such as a newspaper stand, can be held liable for a defamation claim. However, liability due to defamatory speech on the Internet is quite different. …

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.

The Right To Republish Libel: Neutral Reportage And The Reasonable Reader, David Mccraw

Akron Law Review

This Article argues for a reconsideration and redefinition of the neutral reportage privilege. First, even if we accept Gertz's disapproval of newsworthiness as a criterion for First Amendment protection, a closer look at the neutral reportage privilege reveals that, contrary to what many courts and commentators have said, newsworthiness is not a necessary element of the privilege. Gertz is thus inapplicable. Second, the more serious problems with the neutral reportage privilege arise from its advocates' failure to define what constitutes "neutrality"-- in other words, to define what conduct by the reporter should legitimately give rise to immunity from libel actions.

The Odyssey Of A Supreme Court Decision About The Sanctity Of Opinions Under The First Amendment, Richard H.W. Maloy

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Uneasy And Often Unhelpful Interaction Of Tort Law And Constitutional Law In First Amendment Litigation, George C. Christie

Marquette Law Review

There are increasing tensions between the First Amendment and the common law torts of intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and privacy. This Article discusses the conflicting interactions among the three models that are competing for primacy as the tort law governing expressive activities evolves to accommodate the requirements of the First Amendment. At one extreme there is the model that expression containing information which has been lawfully obtained that contains neither intentional falsehoods nor incitements to immediate violence can only be sanctioned in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances, even if that expression involves matters that are universally regarded as being …

How Do We Know When Speech Is Of Low Value?, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Protecting Defamatory Fiction And Reader-Response Theory With Emphasis On The German Experience, Henry Ordower

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Finding The Lost Involuntary Public Figure, Jeffrey Omar Usman

Utah Law Review

This Article follows Aristotle’s guidance that “[i]f you would understand anything, observe its beginning and its development.” That is precisely how the discussion in this Article begins in Part I, through observation of the beginning and development of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the constitutional limitations imposed upon defamation actions under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Part II of the Article then briefly sets forth the constitutional framework that the Supreme Court imposed in 1974 on defamation actions in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. The Article then addresses in Part III how the pressures of the First …

Summary Of Jacobs V. Adelson, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 44, Kylee Gloeckner

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether the absolute privilege rule applies to statements made to the media.

When Speech Isn't Free: Legal Barriers And Consequences Of Reporting Sexual Violence, Kevin M. Fleming

Departmental Honors Projects

Incidents of sexual violence continue to be a serious problem for society. Likewise, acts of sexual violence impose severe consequences for survivors. The consequences initially begin at the onset of the survivor’s journey to psychological recovery following the traumatic sexual assault. The consequences take on a unique set of characteristics when the survivor attempts to use the justice system to confront the perpetrator who committed the offense. These characteristics can transform an adversarial process into an isolated battle for the survivor. In the worst cases, the justice system empowers individuals who wish to silence survivors with free speech restrictions instead …

Zombies Among Us: Injunctions In Defamation Cases Come Back From The Dead, Jim Stewart, Leonard M. Niehoff

Articles

Here's a scary thought: an individual, unhappy with negative statements that have been made about him, sues for defamation and persuades the trial court to issue an injunction prohibiting the speaker from engaging in that speech again. An appellate court reviews the injunction and, in large measure, upholds it. This creepy scenario brings shudders to free speech and media advocates, who have long viewed such injunctions as prior restraints that the First Amendment forbids in all but the most extreme and extraordinary cases. As a recent decision from the Michigan Court of Appeals demonstrates, however, decades of United States Supreme …

Material Falsity In Defamation Cases: The Supreme Court's Call For Contextual Analysis, Charles D. Tobin, Leonard M. Niehoff

Articles

In the book The Phantom Tollbooth, one of the characters, Milo, declares that he comes from a faraway land called Context. After a circuitous journey through many strange cities, bearing names that have meanings Milo struggles to understand, he finds himself back at home in his bedroom.

Context, by and large, is the home base for courts in defining the boundaries between actionable and nonactionable speech. Often, after circuitous travels through precedent and logic, courts meander back to the simple notion that the meaning and legal significance of words are determined by their context.

Re-Establishing Distributor Liability On The Internet: Recognizing The Applicability Of Traditional Defamation Law To Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act Of 1996, William E. Buelow Iii

West Virginia Law Review

Plaintiffs whose reputations have suffered irreparable injury from the distribution of defamatory statements have generally been permitted by law to recover damages from the enterprises that distributed the publications known to contain the defamatory material. However, when the enterprise that knowingly distributed the injurious content is an Internet service provider ("ISP"), present law denies that same plaintiff recovery. This perception of ISP immunity flows from a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Zeran v. America Online, Inc., where the Court extended certain immunities offered by the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (the "CDA"). …

Hustler Magazine, Inc. V. Falwell: Laugh Or Cry, Public Figures Must Learn To Live With Satirical Criticism , James R. Laguzza

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Masson V. New Yorker Magazine, Inc.: Permission For Journalists To Quote What I Mean, Not What I Say, Kevin M. Erwin

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.