First Amendment Commons^™

Authorship, Audiences, And Anonymous Speech, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky, Thomas F. Cotter

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article aims to assist lawmakers and courts to find the proper balance between the right to speak without disclosing one's true identity and the rights of those injured by anonymous speech. To this end, we present both a positive and a normative analysis of anonymous speech. In the positive analysis, we examine the private costs and benefits that speakers encounter when deciding whether to publish with or without attribution; among these costs and benefits are the potentially differing responses of audiences to attributed and nonattributed speech. For example, speakers may feel less vulnerable to retaliation when they speak anonymously, …

The First Amendment And State Regulation Of In-Person Solicitation Of Public Accounting Services, Damaris Rosich-Schwartz

St. Thomas Law Review

This article will discuss the history of the commercial speech doctrine as part of the First Amendment, its past and present protection, and the current test applied to state regulation of commercial speech, concentrating on state regulation of in-person solicitations of professionals, like attorneys and CPAs. This article will further discuss the reasons why an attorney's in-person solicitations can and should be regulated by the states, and why the same reasons apply to CPAs. Additionally, this article will discuss the United States Supreme Court's 1993 decision, Edenfield v. Fane, where the Court held that states cannot regulate in-person solicitations of …

Authorship, Audiences, And Anonymous Speech, Thomas F. Cotter, Lyrissa Lidsky

Faculty Publications

A series of United States Supreme Court decisions establishes that the First Amendment provides a qualified right to speak and publish anonymously, or under a pseudonym. But the Court has never clearly defined the scope of this right. As a result, lower courts have been left with little guidance when it comes to dealing both with the Internet-fueled growth of torts and crimes committed by anonymous speakers, and with the increasing number of lawsuits aimed at silencing legitimate anonymous speech. In this Article, we provide both positive and normative foundations for a comprehensive approach to anonymous speech. We first draw …

Privatizing Public Forums To Eliminate Dissent, Kevin F. O'Neill

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

As the 2008 presidential campaign gets underway, the candidates may be tempted to suppress dissent at public forum rallies by using a tactic that Ronald Reagan pioneered and George W. Bush perfected. Under this tactic, the candidate's advance team “privatizes” a public square or public park by securing a municipal permit for the rally date that authorizes the expulsion of any citizen who manifests support for a rival candidate. At a 2004 Bush re-election rally, citizens who held signs opposing the President or opposing the war in Iraq were systematically expelled from a public park by Secret Service agents, who …

The Media And National Security, Robert A. Sedler

Law Faculty Research Publications

In our discussion of the media and national security, we begin with the First Amendment, not only with its legal doctrines and principles, but also with the values of the First Amendment and its function in a free and democratic society. We will first discuss how the First Amendment protects the media with respect to its disclosure of information purportedly affecting national security. We will then discuss the process by which the media voluntarily refuses to publish information on the ground that the disclosure of the information will seriously harm the national security. We will finally discuss the relationship between …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae, The National Legislative Association On Prescription Drug Prices, The New Hampshire Medical Society, And Prescription Policy Choices In Support Of Defendant's Objection To Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunction, Sean Flynn

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

Plaintiffs in this case seek a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of the New Hampshire Prescription Confidentiality Act, which protects consumers and the privacy interests of doctors in the state of New Hampshire from the increasingly common practice of using doctor-identifying information in prescription records to facilitate targeting of pharmaceutical marketing and gifts toward doctors who prescribe the most expensive drugs for their patients. This practice raises drug costs for all New Hampshire residents and compromises the professional autonomy of doctors. This brief addresses the failure of the plaintiffs to show that they are likely to succeed on the …

Defining Freedom Of The College Press After "Hosty V. Carter", Jessica B. Lyons

Vanderbilt Law Review

The application of the First Amendment to public universities has long been a source of confusion and frustration for both universities and courts. In particular, application of the First Amendment to student publications such as newspapers, magazines, and yearbooks has led to a great deal of litigation and controversy. The protection afforded by the First Amendment to these publications at the university level is extremely unclear and the circuit courts' inconsistent treatment of the college press has further confused the issue.

How should the First Amendment apply to public universities? An instinctive response is that a college student should enjoy …

A Tough Pill To Swallow: Does The First Amendment Prohibit Wv From Regulating Pharmaceutical Companies' Advertising Expenses To Lower The Cost Of Prescription Drugs?, Brienne Taylor Greiner

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporate Speech, Securities Regulation, And An Institutional Approach To The First Amendment, Michael R. Siebecker

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Does the First Amendment shield politically tinged corporate speech from the compelled disclosure and reporting requirements embedded in the U.S. securities laws? The question arises in the securities regulation context because of an impending jurisprudential train wreck between the Supreme Court's commercial speech doctrine and its approach to corporate political speech. As corporations begin mixing commercial messages with political commentary, First Amendment jurisprudence simply provides insufficient guidance on the role government should play in regulating that speech. Although First Amendment jurisprudence generally counsels against governmental restrictions on corporate political speech without regard to the truth or falsity of the message, …

Prayer Or Prison: The Unconstitutionality Of Mandatory Faith-Based Substance Abuse Treatment, Christopher M. Meissner

Cleveland State Law Review

Whether faith-based substance abuse treatments are effective is certainly a valid question in its rightful place, but it is not the inquiry pursued here. Rather, this Note argues that a drug court's act of assigning unwilling offenders to twelve-step or otherwise religiously-based residential treatment centers violates the Establishment Clause guarantee. Specifically, such centers regulate the offenders' beliefs and compel them to affirm whatever tenets are professed at the individual treatment center. Moreover, a court's subsequent act of threatening or actually imposing criminal sanctions upon offenders for refusing to complete such treatment programs constitutes punishment for refusing to be religiously indoctrinated …

Disciplining Public Employees For Expressive Activity, Ann C. Hodges

Law Faculty Publications

A public employee's right to free speech under the First Amendment is not unlimited and employers have the right to discipline employees for expressive activity under certain circumstances (Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 1968). The employer has an interest in ensuring that its etnployees do not under1nine its operations or ll1terfere with acco1nplishment of its objectives. At the same time, employees do not give up their constitutional rights when they accept government employment.

Matters Of Public Concern Standard In Free Speech Cases, Ann C. Hodges

Law Faculty Publications

The public concern standard has operated primarily in two categories of free-speech cases: those involving speech by government employees and those involving defamation.

The Interests Of "Peoples" In The Cooperative Management Of Sacred Sites, Kristen A. Carpenter

Publications

This essay contends that there is a structural element of federal law and policy that sets up legal battles over American Indian sacred sites. The Supreme Court has held that whatever rights groups may have at sacred sites, the federal government's rights as owner and sovereign of the public lands ultimately prevails. Federal agencies can, if they choose, accommodate various interests on the public lands, but such decisions are left to fluctuating executive policy and the discretion of land managers. This approach reflects well-established doctrine in public lands law, but leaves various citizens and groups clamoring for the federal government …

Speech Of Government Employees, Ann C. Hodges

Law Faculty Publications

For many years, government employment was considered a privilege rather than a right, and, as a result, the government could place restrictions on employee speech that would be unconstitutional if applied to citizens.

Relative Access To Corrective Speech: A New Test For Requiring Actual Malice, Aaron Perzanowski

Articles

This Article reexamines the First Amendment protections provided by the public figure doctrine. It suggests that the doctrine is rooted in a set of out-dated assumptions regarding the media landscape and, as a result, has failed to adapt in a manner that accounts for our changing communications environment.

The public figure doctrine, which imposes the more rigorous actual malice standard of fault on defamation plaintiffs who enjoy greater access to mass media, was constructed in an era defined by one-to-many communications media. Newspapers, broadcasters, and traditional publishers exhausted the Court's understanding of the means of communicating with mass audiences. As …

"Gouging The Government": Why A Federal Contingency Fee Lobbying Prohibition Is Consistent With First Amendment Freedoms, Meredith A. Capps

Vanderbilt Law Review

Washington Post writer David Segal once observed, "[f]or most Americans the words 'Washington lobbyist' have roughly the same cachet as, say, 'deadbeat dad."" Both lawmakers and the public regard lobbying as an unsavory part of the political process. Much of this perception stems from the vast sums of money spent each year on lobbying activity. For example, in the first half of 2004 alone, mortgage funding companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reported spending over $11 million on lobbying activities, General Electric spent $8.5 million, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent $20.1 million-and these were only three of the …

Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, Bellecourt, Et Al., V. City Of Cleveland, 544 U.S. 1033, 125 S. Ct. 2271 (2005), Kevin Francis O'Neill, Terry H. Gilbert

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

Deciding an important question of Federal Free Speech law, the Ohio Supreme Court has recognized a fire safety justification so easy to invoke that it may be used to punish virtually every instance of flag burning and effigy burning - thereby undercutting this Court's decision in Texas v. Johnson, and creating a question of first impression that requires this Court's review and correction.

The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow

Faculty Publications

Eminent domain and thought control are occurring in cyberspace. Through the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), the government transfers domain names from domain-name owners to private parties based on the owners' bad-faith intent. The owners receive no just compensation. The private parties who are recipients of the domain names are trademark holders whose trademarks correspond with the domain names. Often the trademark holders have no property rights in those domain names: trademark law only allows mark holders to exclude others from making commercial use of their marks; it does not allow mark holders to reserve the marks for their own …

Scylla Or Charybdis: Navigating The Jurisprudence Of Visual Clutter, Ryan Calo

Articles

State and local governments seeking to address the proliferation of billboards and other outdoor advertising must negotiate two obstacles of First Amendment law. The first is the Supreme Court’s 1981 decision in Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego. Following Metromedia, regulators can neither select among noncommercial messages nor privilege commercial messages over noncommercial ones. For years, regulators navigated around Metromedia by drawing a distinction between commercial and noncommercial speech. Then came the Supreme Court’s decision in City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, holding that regulators had to account for why they were privileging noncommercial over commercial …

The First Amendment's Original Sin, Lee C. Bollinger

Faculty Scholarship

Times of war place considerable stress on civil liberties, especially ones protected by the First Amendment. When the nation must gather itself to fight an enemy who is intent on killing us, it is perhaps only natural that our tolerance for the usual disorder of dissent will decline. When everyone has to sacrifice for the common good, when fellow citizens are dying in that cause, the costs of speech are visible and serious. Dissent may dissuade or discourage soldiers from fighting; sowing doubt may weaken resolve just when it's needed most; falsehoods and misinformation may lead to catastrophic shifts of …

Ub Viewpoint – Journalists May Face Contempt For Protecting Sources, Eric Easton

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Adjudicative Speech And The First Amendment, Christopher J. Peters

All Faculty Scholarship

While political speech - speech intended to influence political decisions - is afforded the highest protection under the First Amendment, adjudicative speech - speech intended to influence court decisions - is regularly and systematically constrained by rules of evidence, canons of professional ethics, judicial gag orders, and similar devices. Yet court decisions can be as important, both to the litigants and to society at large, as political decisions. How then can our practice of severely constraining adjudicative speech be justified as consistent with First Amendment principles?

This Article attempts to answer that question in a way that is informative about …

Symbolic Counter-Speech, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Fire, Metaphor, And Constitutional Myth-Making, Robert Tsai

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

From the standpoint of traditional legal thought, metaphor is at best a dash of poetry adorning lawyerly analysis, and at worst an unjustifiable distraction from what is actually at stake in a legal contest. By contrast, in the eyes of those who view law as a close relative of ordinary language, metaphor is a basic building block of human understanding. This article accepts that metaphor helps us to comprehend a court's decision. At the same time, it argues that metaphor plays a special role in the realm of constitutional discourse. Metaphor in constitutional law not only reinforces doctrinal categories, but …

Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Tests, Government Oversight, And The First Amendment: What The Government Can (And Can't) Do To Protect The Public's Health, Gail H. Javitt, Erica Stanley, Kathy Hudson

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

If The Shoe Fits: Kasky V. Nike And Whether Corporate Statements About Business Operations Should Be Deemed Commercial Speech, Jason A. Cade

Scholarly Works

This Note argues that the Kasky court was correct to recognize that today's commercial speech encompasses communications beyond traditional advertisements about products or services. Corporations are aware that a sizeable number of consumers rely on their statements about their business operations when making investment and purchasing decisions. In order to ensure the accuracy of these statements, and thereby protect the integrity of the market, this speech is properly considered commercial speech.

Public Confidence Laws Gone Awry: A Modern Circuit Split Reveals That Some Federal Courts Manipulate Standing Rules To Promulgate Severe First Amendment Restrictions On The Spouses And Children Of Public Employees, Nicholas R. Farrell

Vanderbilt Law Review

Federal courts in the United States have consistently upheld the constitutional doctrine that "[t]he essential rights of the First Amendment in some instances are subject to the elemental need for order without which the guarantees of civil rights to others would be a mockery." Given the central role of government workers in maintaining that order, the First Amendment rights of public employees have been particularly susceptible to restriction. For example, in 1940, Congress enacted the Hatch Act, which declared unlawful certain political activities of federal employees. Specifically, section nine of the Act prohibited officers and employees in the executive branch …

Fire, Metaphor, And Constitutional Myth-Making, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

From the standpoint of traditional legal thought, metaphor is at best a dash of poetry adorning lawyerly analysis, and at worst an unjustifiable distraction from what is actually at stake in a legal contest. By contrast, in the eyes of those who view law as a close relative of ordinary language, metaphor is a basic building block of human understanding. This article accepts that metaphor helps us to comprehend a court's decision. At the same time, it argues that metaphor plays a special role in the realm of constitutional discourse. Metaphor in constitutional law not only reinforces doctrinal categories, but …

Assimilation, Toleration, And The State's Interest In The Development Of Religious Doctrine, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

Thirty-five years ago, in the context of a church-property dispute, Justice William Brennan observed that government interpretation of religious doctrine and judicial intervention in religious disputes are undesirable, because when civil courts undertake to resolve [doctrinal] controversies..., the hazards are ever present of inhibiting the free development of religious doctrine and of implicating secular interests in matters of purely ecclesiastical concern. This statement, at first, seems wise and fittingly cautious, even unremarkable and obvious. On examination, though, it turns out to be intriguing, elusive, and misleading. Indeed, Justice Brennan's warning presents hazards of its own, and its premises - if …

“The Corporate Conscience” And Other First Amendment Follies In Pacific Gas & Electric

San Diego Law Review

No abstract provided.