First Amendment Commons^™

Fighting The New Wars Of Religion: The Need For A Tolerant First Amendment, Leslie C. Griffin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Snyder V. Phelps: Searching For A Legal Standard, Leslie C. Griffin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Citizens United And The Corporate Form, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Articles

In Citizens United vs. FEC, the Supreme Court struck down a Federal statute banning direct corporate expenditures on political campaigns. The decision has been widely criticized and praised as a matter of First Amendment law. But it is also interesting as another step in the evolution of our legal views of the corporation. This Article argues that by viewing Citizens Unitedthrough the prism of theories about the corporate form, it is possible to see that the majority and the dissent departed from previous Supreme Court jurisprudence on the First Amendment rights of corporations. It is also possible to then predict …

When Is Religious Speech Outrageous?: Snyder V. Phelps And The Limits Of Religious Advocacy, Jeffrey Shulman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Constitution affords great protection to religiously motivated speech. Religious liberty would mean little if it did not mean the right to profess and practice as well as to believe. But are there limits beyond which religious speech loses its constitutional shield? Would it violate the First Amendment to subject a religious entity to tort liability if its religious profession causes emotional distress? When is religious speech outrageous?

These are vexing questions, to say the least; but the United States Supreme Court will take them up next term—and it will do so in a factual context that has generated as …

Propaganda For War And Transparency, Richard B. Collins

Publications

No abstract provided.

Cyberspace Is Outside The Schoolhouse Gate: Offensive, Online Student Speech Receives First Amendment Protection, Joseph A. Tomain

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Normative and doctrinal analysis shows that schools do not possess jurisdiction over offensive online student speech, at least when it does not cause a substantial disruption of the school environment. This article is a timely analysis on the limits of school jurisdiction over offensive online student speech.

On February 4, 2010, two different Third Circuit panels issued opinions reaching opposite conclusions on whether schools may punish students based on online speech created by students when they are off-campus. The Third Circuit vacated both decisions and is considering these cases in a consolidated en banc appeal. Another case addressing the same …

Honest To Blog: Balancing The Interests Of Public Figures And Anonymous Bloggers In Defamation Lawsuits, Yang-Ming Tham

Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal (1994 - )

No abstract provided.

The Myth Of The Level Playing Field: Knowledge, Affect, And Repetition In Public Debate, Jeremy N. Sheff

Faculty Publications

The industrialization of the channels and scale of communication has led some well-meaning reformers to try to regulate the ability of powerful private actors to leverage economic inequality into political inequality, particularly in the area of campaign finance. Such reform efforts are ostensibly intended to further the deliberative democratic ideal of rational, informed public decision making by preventing well-funded private interests from improperly influencing democratic debate and, by extension, political outcomes. This Article examines empirical findings in political science, psychology, and marketing and argues that, in the context of contemporary American society, the normative principles of deliberative democracy and formal …

Minimalism And Deliberative Democracy: A Closer Look At The Virtues Of "Shallowness", Matthew J. Steilen

Journal Articles

Cass Sunstein has long argued that judicial minimalism promotes democracy. According to Sunstein’s view, a court can encourage the political branches of government to address an issue by using doctrines such as vagueness, nondelegation, and desuetude. Although much has been written about minimalism, very little has been said about the democracy-promotion thesis in particular. Yet it is one of the central claims of contemporary minimalism. This article attempts to remedy the deficiency. It argues that minimalism does not promote democracy because minimalist decisions lack the depth necessary to trigger democratic deliberation. The argument occurs in three steps. First, the article …

Hate Speech And The Language Of Racism In Latin America: A Lens For Reconsidering Global Hate Speech Restrictions And Legislation Models, Tanya K. Hernandez

Faculty Scholarship

In Latin America, like many countries in Europe, hate speech is prohibited. Yet Latin America is rarely included in the transnational discussion regarding the regulation of hate speech. Instead, the discourse focuses on a comparison of the advisability of Europe's hate speech regulations and free speech acceptance of hate speech in the United States. As a result, the ability to fundamentally examine the connections between hate speech and inequality, in addition to the most effective legal mechanisms for addressing it, is undermined. It is especially critical to broaden the hate speech debate now that we are seeing an apparent rise …

Speech Platforms Law Review Symposium 2010: Government Speech: The Government's Ability To Compel And Restrict Speech, Abner S. Greene

Faculty Scholarship

The state plays different roles, and free speech doctrine should (and sometimes does) respect these roles. We properly insist (with some categorical exceptions) that the state not regulate private speech based on subject matter or point of view. If private speakers want to praise the Nazis or condemn homosexuality, the state has no place stopping them, even if firmly convinced these ideas are wrong. Why we have such firm protection for speech we abhor is a matter of much debate. To some extent, it's because we don't trust the state to make content-based judgments consistently as a matter of principle; …

What The Abortion Disclosure Cases Say About The Constitutionality Of Persuasive Government Speech On Product Labels, Leslie Gielow Jacobs

McGeorge School of Law Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

Don't Feed The Alligators: Government Funding Of Political Speech And The Unyielding Vigilance Of The First Amendment, Joel M. Gora

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Protecting Free Speech For Unequivocal Fair Users: Rethinking Our Interpretation Of The §512(F) Misrepresentation Clause, Jordan Koss

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Sects' Offenders: The Inefficacy Of Sex Offender Residency Laws And Their Burdens On The Free Exercise Of Religion, Amol N. Sinha

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Singer Did Not Approve This Message: Analyzing The Unauthorized Use Of Copyrighted Music In Political Advertisements In Jackson Browne V. John Mccain, David C. Johnston

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A Duty To Serve?: Assessing The Application Of Religious Exemptions For Marriage Officiants In Same-Sex Marriage Laws With Lessons Learned From The Reproductive Rights World, Christina Coiro

Student Works

No abstract provided.

Modern Application Of The Right Of Publicity To Virtual Avatars, Elina Slavin

Student Works

No abstract provided.

In Celebration Of Steven Shiffrin's The Religious Left And Church-State Relations, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

Steven Shiffrin's The Religious Left and Church-State Relations is a truly remarkable book in many respects. I shall briefly note a few of its striking features, including some illustrative passages, and outline a number of its central themes, before tackling what for me is its most challenging and perplexing set of theses – the relations between constitutional and political discourse, and between religious liberals, on the one hand, and religious conservatives and secular liberals on the other.

We might well think of this as two books in one: a book about the constitutional law of free exercise and non-establishment, and …

Regulating Cyberharassment: Some Thoughts On Sexual Harassment 2.0, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

Government Speech 2.0, Helen Norton, Danielle Keats Citron

Publications

New expressive technologies continue to transform the ways in which members of the public speak to one another. Not surprisingly, emerging technologies have changed the ways in which government speaks as well. Despite substantial shifts in how the government and other parties actually communicate, however, the Supreme Court to date has developed its government speech doctrine--which recognizes "government speech" as a defense to First Amendment challenges by plaintiffs who claim that the government has impermissibly excluded their expression based on viewpoint--only in the context of disputes involving fairly traditional forms of expression. In none of these decisions, moreover, has the …

Shining A Light On Democracy's Dark Lagoon, Helen Norton

Publications

Written for a symposium examining the Fourth Circuit’s jurisprudential tradition, this short essay explores the Fourth Circuit’s approach to the emerging government speech doctrine, under which the government’s own speech is exempt from free speech clause scrutiny. In developing this doctrine, the Supreme Court has been too quick to defer to public entities’ assertion that contested speech is their own; indeed, it has yet to deny the government’s claim to expression in the face of a competing private claim – at significant cost to the public’s ability to hold government politically accountable for its expressive choices. The Fourth Circuit, in …

Summum, The Vocality Of Public Places, And The Public Forum, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Territoriality And The First Amendment: Free Speech At - And Beyond - Our Borders, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A Preliminary First Amendment Analysis Of Legislation Treating News Aggregation As Copyright Infringement, Alfred C. Yen

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The newspaper industry has recently experienced economic difficulty. Profits have declined because fewer people read printed versions of newspapers, preferring instead to get their news through so-called "news aggregators" who compile newspaper headlines and provide links to stories posted on newspaper websites. This harms newspaper revenue because news aggregators collect advertising revenue that newspapers used to enjoy.

Some have responded to this problem by advocating the use of copyright to give newspapers the ability to control the use of their stories and headlines by news aggregators. This proposal is controversial, for news aggregators often do not commit copyright infringement. Accordingly, …

Educating The United States Supreme Court At Summers' School: A Lesson On The "Special Character Of The Animal", Rafael Gely, Ramona L. Paetzold, Leonard Bierman

Faculty Publications

In this article, we explore the implications that Professor Summers' insights regarding public employment have for the Garcetti and Davenport decisions. In particular, we focus on the extent to which the political nature of public employment affects public employees' rights to freedom of speech as well as matters regarding the representational functions of public employee unions.

"Cover My Pills": Contraceptive Equity And Religious Liberty In Catholic Charities V. Dinallo, Ayelet S. Lebovicz

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note  examines the tension between the New York Womens Health and Wellness Act's (WHWA) goal of promoting women's health through contraceptive access and its burden on the First Amendment rights of religious employers. It argues that while the WHWA advances significant public health interests, its contraceptive mandate imposes substantial burdens on religious freedom and free speech, necessitating strict scrutiny. The analysis critiques the New York Court of Appeals' decision for failing to fully consider the plaintiffs' hybrid-rights claims under Supreme Court precedent, highlighting the need for lawmakers to balance competing interests while adhering to constitutional protections.

A Popular Approach To Popular Constitutionalism: The First Amendment, Civic Education, And Constitutional Change, Thomas G. Donnelly

Law Faculty Publications

Popular constitutionalists fear that our constitutional culture is becoming less popular. At the same time, these scholars often ignore key popular sources of constitutional meaning. Their accounts focus,  instead, on the elite conflicts that give rise to constitutional change, particularly the ongoing debates between elected officials, movement leaders, and the Supreme Court. Although these studies are essential to understanding the pathways for promoting non-Article V constitutional change, they are "popular" only in the sense that they focus on non-judicial actors and politically salient controversies. The constitutional life of the average citizen is generally ignored. If legal scholars are serious about …

Constitutional Protection For Non-Media Defendants: Should There Be A Distinction Between You And Larry King?, Rebecca Phillips

Campbell Law Review

This Comment considers the current law, contemplates the rapid growth of technology and proposes an answer to the following two questions: Should there be a distinction between media and nonmedia defendants? If so, who should be offered more protection: You or Larry King? To answer these questions, Part I summarizes traditional and current defamation law and the First Amendment protections that have been meted out by the courts. Part II discusses the court decisions that have noted whether a distinction between media and nonmedia defendants is meritorious and critiques those conclusions in light of the development of defamation law. Part …

Government Speech 2.0, Helen Norton, Danielle K. Citron

Faculty Scholarship

New expressive technologies continue to transform the ways in which members of the public speak to one another. Not surprisingly, emerging technologies have changed the ways in which government speaks as well. Despite substantial shifts in how the government and other parties actually communicate, however, the Supreme Court to date has developed its government speech doctrine – which recognizes “government speech” as a defense to First Amendment challenges by plaintiffs who claim that the government has impermissibly excluded their expression based on viewpoint – only in the context of disputes involving fairly traditional forms of expression. In none of these …