First Amendment Commons^™

Hot Off The Press: An Argument For A Federal Shield Law Affording A Qualified Evidentiary Privilege To Journalists In Light Of Renewed Concerns About Freedom Of The Press And National Security, Nicole N. Wentworth

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

Does The Press Have A Right To Be Wrong?: Fake News, Press Freedom, And Defamation Law In 2021, Nathan T. Danielson

Journalism

The following study analyzes defamation lawsuits filed against Fox News and its on-air personalities by companies that manufactured and maintained voting machines used in the 2020 US presidential election. Smartmatic and Dominion accused Fox in court of broadcasting debunked allegations that the companies had rigged the election against incumbent president (and longtime Fox viewer) Donald Trump. The size of the sought-after damages, and the size of Fox itself, make this the largest “fake news suit” in history. This study explores the merits of the suits, defenses to defamation (particularly opinion, political speech, and retraction) and the potential ramifications of a …

A More Perfect Pickering Test: Janus V. Afscme Council 31 And The Problem Of Public Employee Speech, Alexandra J. Gilewicz

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In June 2018, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited—and, for the American labor movement, long-feared—decision in Janus v. AFSCME Council 31. The decision is expected to have a major impact on public sector employee union membership, but could have further impact on public employees’ speech rights in the workplace. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito’s broad interpretation of whether work-related speech constitutes a “matter of public concern” may have opened the floodgates to substantially more litigation by employees asserting that their employers have violated their First Amendment rights. Claims that would have previously been unequivocally foreclosed may now …

Private Schools' Role And Rights In Setting Vaccination Policy: A Constitutional And Statutory Puzzle, Hillel Y. Levin

William & Mary Law Review

Measles and other vaccine-preventable childhood diseases are making a comeback, as a growing number of parents are electing not to vaccinate their children. May private schools refuse admission to these students? This deceptively simple question raises complex issues of First Amendment law and statutory interpretation, and it also has implications for other current hot-button issues in constitutional law, including whether private schools may discriminate against LGBTQ students. This Article is the first to address the issue of private schools’ rights to exclude unvaccinated children. It finds that the answer is “it depends.” It also offers a model law that states …

The Copyright Act’S Mandatory-Deposit Requirement: Unnecessary And Unconstitutional, Drew Thornley

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Many people are unaware of a federal copyright statute that requires owners of material published in the United States to furnish the federal government with two copies of each item published. Section 407(a) of the Copyright Act of 1976 (17 U.S.C. § 407) states that “the owner of copyright or of the exclusive right of publication in a work published in the United States shall deposit, within three months after the date of such publication—(1) two complete copies of the best edition; or (2) if the work is a sound recording, two complete phonorecords of the best edition, together with …

Private Schools' Role And Rights In Setting Vaccination Policy: A Constitutional And Statutory Puzzle, Hillel Y. Levin

Scholarly Works

Measles and other vaccine-preventable childhood diseases are making a comeback, as a growing number of parents are electing not to vaccinate their children. May private schools refuse admission to these students? This deceptively simple question raises complex issues of First Amendment law and statutory interpretation, and it also has implications for other current hot-button issues in constitutional law, including whether private schools may discriminate against LGBTQ students. This Article is the first to address the issue of private schools’ rights to exclude unvaccinated children. It finds that the answer is “it depends.” It also offers a model law that states …

Straight Outta Scotus: Domestic Violence, True Threats, And Free Speech, Jessica Miles

University of Miami Law Review

Domestic violence intersects with constitutional, criminal, and civil law in ways that often present challenges for jurists seeking to reconcile conflicting interests in promoting victim safety and protecting the legal rights of those accused of abuse. One current issue presenting such tensions relates to “true threats” of violence which the U.S. Supreme Court considers to be among the categories of speech receiving only limited First Amendment protection. The Supreme Court has yet to indicate what level of intent would be constitutionally sufficient for conviction of a speaker of a true threat and the circuit courts have split on this issue. …

Masterpiece Cakeshop'S Homiletics, Marc Spindelman

Cleveland State Law Review

Viewed closely and comprehensively, Masterpiece Cakeshop, far from simply being the narrow, shallow, and modest decision many have taken it to be, is a rich, multi-faceted decision that cleaves and binds the parties to the case, carefully managing conflictual crisis. Through a ruling for a faithful custom-wedding-cake baker against a state whose legal processes are held to have been marred by anti-religious bias, the Court unfolds a cross-cutting array of constitutional wins and losses for cultural conservatives and traditional moralists, on the one hand, and for lesbians and gay men and their supporters committed to civil and equal rights, …

The Nfl Player, The Schoolchild, And The Entertainer: When The Term "Free Speech" Is Too Freely Spoken, Exactly "Who's On First?", Christian Ketter

Cleveland State Law Review

As America’s media and politicians continue to debate the free speech rights of NFL players, schoolchildren, and entertainers, the dialogue has confused many Americans as to what exactly the First Amendment protects. Chief Justice John G. Roberts ultimately assumes the role of an umpire in many of these issues, guiding the United States Supreme Court to incrementally “call balls and strikes.” In recent years, the Court has umpired employment rights and state action cases, and Roberts’s calls will likely further distance the Court that decided Morse v. Frederick from the one that decided Tinker v. Des Moines. Amid a …

In God We Trust (Unless We Change Our Mind): How State Of Mind Relates To Religious Arbitration, Skylar Reese Croy

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Arguably, binding religious arbitration agreements are constitutionally problematic because they hinder freedom of religion: They inhibit parties’ ability to change their beliefs. However, religious arbitration agreements also offer an outlet for the religiously inclined to further practice their beliefs. This Article offers a middle ground: If a party to a religious arbitration agreement changes religion, he or she can claim a “conscientious objector” status if he or she can prove the agreement violates his or her sincerely held religious beliefs. Courts are allowed to inquire into the sincerity of a person’s religious beliefs. The religious question doctrine — which restricts …

Some Limits On The Judicial Power To Restrict Dissemination Of Discovery, Thomas C. Bradley

Maine Law Review

The pretrial process of discovery governed by Federal and Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 26 enables plaintiffs in product liability actions to delve where few people have delved before—into a corporation's internal memoranda, competitive practices, and secret product or design information as well as other less sensitive information in a company's possession. Discovery, in this context as in others, is a powerful tool determined by the courts to be necessary for the just litigation of claims. As a balance to the leeway given parties to compel production of information in discovery, federal and Maine courts have the authority under Federal …

Privileged Violence, Principled Fantasy, And Feminist Method: The Colby Fraternity Case, Martha T. Mccluskey

Maine Law Review

Colby College banned fraternities and sororities in 1984 after many years of unsuccessfully attempting to improve fraternity behavior. Sexual harassment and sex discrimination were major reasons for the college's decision. At first the college withheld official recognition of and financial benefits to the fraternities. Membership in fraternities was not punished, although Colby established a policy prohibiting any participation in fraternities. The college had hoped that without houses, financing, and other support from the administration, the fraternities would disband—particularly once all students who had belonged to the officially sanctioned groups had graduated. Although the sororities soon dissolved, most of the male …

First Amendment “Harms”, Stephanie H. Barclay

Indiana Law Journal

What role should harm to third parties play in the government’s ability to protect religious rights? The intuitively appealing “harm” principle has animated new theories advanced by scholars who argue that religious exemptions are indefensible whenever they result in cognizable harm to third parties. This third-party harm theory is gaining traction in some circles, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s pending cases in Little Sisters of the Poor and Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. While focusing on harm appears at first to provide an appealing, simple, and neutral principle for avoiding other difficult moral questions, the definition of harm …

Public Accommodations & Human Flourishing: Sexual Orientation & Religious Liberty: An Essay In Honor Of Greg Alexander, Joseph William Singer

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

Greg Alexander's monumental contributions to our understanding of property and property law are unequaled. He is also a mensch and that comes through loud and clear in his work. His recent book, Property and Human Flourishing, develops a quasi-Aristotelian theory of property that focuses our attention on the ways property law protects plural incommensurable objective values that regulate social relationships in order to empower us to become the authors of our own lives. This Essay honors him and his contributions by applying his analysis to the fraught question of whether owners of public accommodations must serve the public without regard …

Kansas V. Boettger: On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of The State Of Kansas, Paul Cassell, John Ehrett, Allyson N. Ho, Bradley Hubbard, Matthew Scorcio, Philip Axt, Thomas Molloy

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

This amicus brief in support of Kansas’ petition for certiorari in Kansas v. Boettger discusses the important issue of whether the First Amendment require proof of specific intent to criminally punish violent threats. The brief argues that the First Amendment does not contain any such requirement and that creating any such requirement would interfere with effective prosecution of domestic violence.

The Kansas Supreme Court’s decision over which review is being sought required the state to prove that an abuser had a specific intent to cause fear. If allowed to stand, the decision will make prosecuting and preventing domestic violence even …

Freedom Of The Press In Post-Truthism America, Ronnell Anderson Jones, Lisa Grow Sun

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Freedom of the press in America is at a critical crossroads in a number of ways, but one stands out as most fundamental: the stark impact of the current debate over “Post-Truthism.” Press freedom jurisprudence has long been structured around the concept of an audience member’s search for truth in a marketplace of ideas. But social science research increasingly suggests that individual information consumers are in fact often driven by emotion, affirmation of political identity, and the need for cognitive shortcuts, and that they may not possess the truth-seeking, rational processing, or information-updating capabilities that the Court assumes. Whether this …

Unclear Hostility: Supreme Court Discussions Of “Hostility To Religion” From Barnette To American Legion, Mark Satta

Buffalo Law Review

Appeals to “hostility to religion” have been a regular part of the Supreme Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence for the last eighty years, but in all that time the Court has never provided a clear explanation of what constitutes “hostility to religion.” This lack of explanation has recently become increasingly troubling given the significant role that the concept of “hostility to religion” has played in several high-profile Supreme Court decisions within the last two years, including Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado, Trump v. Hawaii, and American Legion v. American Humanist Association. In this paper, I provide a thorough and detailed history of …

Clark Memorandum: Spring 2020, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Byu Law School Alumni Association, J. Reuben Clark Law Society

The Clark Memorandum

• Of Rights and Responsibilities: The Social Ecosystem of Religious Freedom
• I am the Woman Who Can
• Flashes of Light: Thoughts on Circumstantial Evidence
• Capital Markets and Human Flourishing

Read on Issuu

Brief Of First Amendment Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Tabatha Abu El-Haj, Timothy Zick, Hyland Hunt

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Shutting Down Speech 101: Saving Campus Free Speech From The Heckler’S Veto And The Speech Gerrymander, Charles Adside Iii

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

No abstract provided.

Government Speech Doctrine—Legislator-Led Prayer's Saving Grace, Daniel M. Vitagliano

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note argues that Lund was decided incorrectly in part because the Fourth Circuit failed to analyze the type of speech at issue before assessing the constitutionality of the prayer practice. This Note is composed of four parts. Part I surveys the Supreme Court’s legislative prayer jurisprudence—Marsh and Town of Greece. Part II outlines Lund and Bormuth, and the Fourth and Sixth Circuits’ dissimilar applications of the Supreme Court’s precedent. Part III argues that courts must first classify legislative prayers as either government or private speech before assessing whether a prayer practice violates the Establishment Clause. It further argues …

Free Exercise Standing: Extra-Centrality As Injury In Fact, Brendan T. Beery

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Part I of this Article surveys standing doctrine generally and tackles the problem of psychic insult—what might fairly, in some cases, be characterized as hurt feelings—as an injury. Part II addresses the special problems of finding concrete and palpable injuries in religion cases, noting that it is more difficult to identify such injuries in Establishment Clause cases than in free exercise cases. When free exercise is viewed as dynamic and kinetic, free exercise injuries are discernible and concrete: they occur when a person is forced to participate in religious undertakings or express beliefs against his or her will, or …

Supreme Court Journalism: From Law To Spectacle?, Barry Sullivan, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Washington and Lee Law Review

Few people outside certain specialized sectors of the press and the legal profession have any particular reason to read the increasingly voluminous opinions through which the Justices of the Supreme Court explain their interpretations of the Constitution and laws. Most of what the public knows about the Supreme Court necessarily comes from the press. That fact raises questions of considerable importance to the functioning of our constitutional democracy: How, for example, does the press describe the work of the Supreme Court? And has the way in which the press describes the work of the Court changed over the past several …

How Conscientious Objectors Killed The Draft: The Collapse Of The Selective Service During The Vietnam War, Bill Raley

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article argues that a key-but-overlooked factor in the Vietnam-era breakdown of the draft system was the Supreme Court’s expansion of the religious conscientious objector ("CO") exemption. It asserts that the Court understood that the CO exemption violated the Establishment Clause, but rather than strike the exemption down, the Court avoided the constitutional issue by interpreting away the religious element of CO statutes. The Article concludes that the Court’s rulings caused CO exemptions to skyrocket, which in turn caused the draft system to collapse toward the end of the Vietnam War.

Brief Of Constitutional Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, David F. Forte, Ronald J. Colombo, Richard Epstein, Carl H. Esbeck, Robert P. George, Mary Ann Glendon, Brian Mccall, Stacy Scaldo, Steven Smith

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

Lurking behind the regulatory issues presented by this appeal is a concerted effort to displace the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb et seq. ("RFRA"), with a novel approach that would trivialize a law's burden on religion. The Court should not indulge it.

The critics' argument suffers from several analytical defects that can be remedied by (1) a proper constitutional understanding of RFRA's relationship to the Establishment Clause; (2) an accurate understanding of how the Religion Clauses safeguard third-party interests; and (3) the correct application of these understandings to the Final Rules.

Executive Authority And Free Speech: An Analysis On The Restraints Of Presidential Power, Leta Lohrmeyer

UNO Student Research and Creative Activity Fair

This analysis examines the implications of social media platforms in connection to free speech and presidential power. Specifically, this study will be drawing on a precedent legal case, Knight First Amendment Inst. v. Trump (2019) along with other cases that are relevant to this paper. This research is contributing to the literature by exploring the topic of how developing technology is influencing political communication. Results support the idea that the definition of public forum needs to be expanded and updated to include social media. Theoretical consequences for the role of social media in connection to executive authority and First Amendment …

Religious Liberty, Discrimination, And Same-Sex Marriage: Escaping The Obergefell Catch-22, Timothy Bradley

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note will explore the tension between Justice Kennedy’s words in Obergefell v. Hodges regarding the decent and honorable premises behind the judgment of many Americans that same-sex marriage is immoral (or, strictly speaking, impossible), and the treatment afforded to those who attempt to live out those supposedly decent and honorable beliefs in the public square—bakers, florists, photographers, pizza connoisseurs, and more. It will assess the relationship between religious liberty, freedom of speech, and antidiscrimination laws by focusing on issues in the realm of sex and marriage, though complicity claims like the ones explored here arise in various other contexts, …

Tinker-Ing With Machine Learning: The Legality And Consequences Of Online Surveillance Of Students, Amy B. Cyphert

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A Democratic Political Economy For The First Amendment, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Review

In this Article, I begin building an interpretation of the First Amendment that promotes the practical conditions for a vital democracy. I argue that considerations of distributive justice do properly affect interpretation of free speech and religious liberty. This is true even assuming that those provisions have priority over ordinary law, including economic regulation.

The Liberty Impact Of Gender, Kingsly Alec Mcconnell

Washington Law Review

Can the federal government unilaterally change your gender? In October of 2018, the New York Times revealed that the Trump Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services was considering a new federal definition of “gender.” The policy would redefine gender as a “biological, immutable condition determined by genitalia at birth.” This policy places transsex people at a substantial risk of deprivation of property and speech rights, as gender implicates both property and expression. It also impedes the exercise of substantive due process rights and privileges and immunities. For example, inaccurate gender designations can hinder a transsex parent’s ability to raise …