First Amendment Commons^™

Constitutional Law, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This 1981 article discusses principles of federal constitutional law. Professor Baker notes that the constitutional decisions of the courts of appeals will continue to increase in number and importance as the burgeoning federal caseload grows. Professor Baker analyzes how the Fifth Circuit dealt with constitutional principles in the year preceding the article. The article commences with a discussion of cases dealing with justiciability issues. The justiciability issues discussed include standing, mootness, advisory opinions, political questions, ripeness, and Eleventh Amendment issues. Next, Professor Baker discusses cases construing the Commerce Clause. Next, the article discusses cases dealing with due process issues, both …

The Public, The Media And The Criminal Defendant: Access To Courtrooms Prevails Over Fears Of Prejudicial Publicity, W. Martine Harrell

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Defamation And The First Amendment: Protecting Speech On Public Issues, Bruce J. Borrus

Washington Law Review

The common law of defamation collided with the United States Constitution in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, and aftershocks from that collision have been rumbling for sixteen years. Ever since the New York Times Court asserted that the first and fourteenth amendments impose restraints on a state's power to afford a civil remedy for wrongful injury to reputation, the Supreme Court has been torn between its concern for personal reputation and its competing concern for free expression. The difficulty of resolving the conflict between these two concerns has forced the Court to decide a long line of cases …

Defamation And The First Amendment: Protecting Speech On Public Issues, Bruce J. Borrus

Washington Law Review

The common law of defamation collided with the United States Constitution in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, and aftershocks from that collision have been rumbling for sixteen years. Ever since the New York Times Court asserted that the first and fourteenth amendments impose restraints on a state's power to afford a civil remedy for wrongful injury to reputation, the Supreme Court has been torn between its concern for personal reputation and its competing concern for free expression. The difficulty of resolving the conflict between these two concerns has forced the Court to decide a long line of cases in …

The Mystique Of Secrecy: The Government's Attempt At Prior Restraint, Erwin Knoll

In the Public Interest

No abstract provided.

People V. Onofre: Can The State Peek Into Your Bedroom?, Matthew Thomas Robinson

In the Public Interest

No abstract provided.

Bernard V. Gulf Oil Co., 619 F.2d 459 (5th Cir. 1980), Robert S. Cohen

Florida State University Law Review

Constitutional Law-FIRST AMENDMENT-PRIOR RESTRAINT-CLASS ACTIONS-SILENCE IS GOLDEN, BUT A RULE 23(d) JUDICIAL ORDER IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL PRIOR RESTRAINT ON SPEECH

Receivers, Churches And Nonprofit Corporations: A First Amendment Analysis, Darrell R. Shepard

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

United States V. Progressive, Inc.: The National Security And Free Speech Conflict, Janet M. Nesse

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And The Free Press: A Comment On Some New Trends And Some Old Theories, William W. Van Alstyne

Faculty Publications

Responding to the trend of media rights being subjugated through the legal process, this article examines Justice Stewart's suggestion that the media should be treated with extra deference in First Amendment cases. This examination looks at the sufficiency of the press's claim of judicial harshness, whether the press should be treated differently than other speakers, and also compares press freedom in foreign nations.

The Right To Scrutinize Government: Toward A First Amendment Theory Of Accountability, Anthony Lewis

University of Miami Law Review

The speaker eschews the view that the press enjoys a "preferred position" under the first amendment and aligns his beliefs with the view of Alexander Meiklejohn-an informed public is necessary for the success of a self-governing democracy. Mr. Lewis analyzes case law and concludes that the Court should cautiously "develop the principle of public accountability as a fundamental premise of the first amendment," guaranteeing a limited right of acquiring information to scrutinize government.

Commentary: The Limited Utility Of The First Amendment As A Means Of Securing Access By The Press And The Public To Proceedings In Criminal Cases, Edward L. Barrett Jr.

University of Miami Law Review

The author examines the models proposed in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale to provide constitutional protection of a public interest in access to judicial proceedings without impairing the interest of the defendant in a fair trial. Whether based on the first amendment or the sixth amendment, a constitutional approach requiring an immediate and delicate balancing of those interests by the trial court would be, in the author's view, unsatisfactory and unworkable. In the alternative, he suggests that legislative rather than judicial balancing may provide a more practical solution.

Note: Richmond Newspapers, Inc. V. Virginia: A Demarcation Of Access, Dennis Scholl

University of Miami Law Review

Several months after this symposium, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, holding that the Constitution implicitly guarantees the right of the public to attend a criminal trial, which a court must keep open to the public, absent an express finding of an overriding interest. This note explores the numerous opinions in Richmond Newspapers to determine whether that case has expanded access rights since the recent decision in Gannett Co. v. DePasquale. The author reconciles the two decisions and concludes that the issues raised in the symposium remain vital.

The First Amendment And The Press, Irwin P. Stotzky

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Press Rights And Government Power To Structure The Press, C. Edwin Baker

University of Miami Law Review

First, Professor Baker explores an instrumentalist argument for special press rights going beyond those protected by a liberty theory of freedom of speech. Then, in Part II, he examines the threats of -government power and private economic power to freedom of the "press" and considers the permissible extent of government intervention to structure the press or to protect it from private threats.

Panel Discussion

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Search Of Premises, Irving Younger

University of Miami Law Review

No abstract provided.

Teacher Dismissal: A View From Mount Healthy, E. Gordon Gee

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law-Defamation-The Supreme Court Places Further Limitations On Designation As A "Public Figure" In Libel Actions- Wolston V. Reader's Digest Association, 443 U.S. 147 (1979)

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law-Free Exercise Of Religion-State May Require A Photograph On A Drivers License Though The Licensee's Religious Beliefs Prohibits Photographs Of Any Type--Johnson V. Motor Vehicle Division, 593 P.2d 1363 (Colo. 1979)

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Conflicting Standards For Applying The Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege, Kay E. Stephenson

Vanderbilt Law Review

The attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between client and attorney from forced disclosure.' Dating back to at least 1577, the privilege arose from the belief that it was a point of honor for the attorney to keep his client's confidences.'The modern rationale for the privilege, however, is the perceived need to encourage full and frank discussion between attorney and client by removing the fear of forced disclosure.' Thus, the privilege rests on the premise that the social benefits derived from uninhibited communication and from the attorney's access to all the facts outweigh the detrimental effects of concealing information during trial.' …

The Public Broadcasting Act: The Licensee Editorializing Ban And The First Amendment, John C. Grabow

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article contends that the public is deprived of an important source of information on public affairs issues as a result of the section 399(a) prohibition on editorializing. After an examination of the legislative history of Section 399(a), and the heritage of broadcast regulation in the United States, the article concludes that the prohibition on editorializing is an improper restriction on free expression in violation of the First Amendment.

Judicial Restrictions On Attorneys' Speech Concerning Pending Litigation: Reconciling The Rights To Fair Trial And Freedom Of Speech, Sally R. Weaver

Vanderbilt Law Review

The constitutionality of restraints on attorneys' speech has been considered by only two federal circuit courts: the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago Council of Lawyers v. Bauer,' and, more recently, the Fourth Circuit, in Hirschkop v. Snead.' Relying on many of the same precedents, the circuits nevertheless developed seemingly contrary standards. This Recent Development compares the analyses of these recent cases and suggests an appropriate standard for the accommodation of the conflicting rights of free speech and a fair trial.

Government Speech, Steven H. Shiffrin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Constitutional Law - First Amendment - Establishment Of Religion, Jennifer Fox Rabold

Duquesne Law Review

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has held that teaching a course in the Science of Creative Intelligence Transcendental Meditation in public high schools is an establishment of religion prohibited by the first amendment.

Malnak v. Yogi, 592 F.2d 197 (3d Cir. 1979).

Constitutional Law - First Amendment - Defamation - Public Figures - Discovery - Editorial Process - Privilege, Jerry V. Haines

Duquesne Law Review

The United States Supreme Court has held that there is no first amendment privilege against discovery into the editorial process of a media defendant in a defamation action by a public figure.

Herbert v. Lando, 441 U.S. 153 (1979)

Constitutional Law - Attorneys' Right To Free Speech Versus Protection Of Fair Trial - Dr 7-107 Restricting Attorneys' Speech During Pending Litigation Only Constitutional To Protect Criminal Jury Trial From Reasonable Likelihood Of Prejudice, Eugene Hamill

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.

Restrictions On Electric Utility Advertising, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

This Note reconsiders the constitutionality of New York's restriction on advertising by electric utilities. Section I explains how and why the Supreme Court's current analysis of the first amendment distinguishes commercial speech from other forms of speech. Section II looks at what protection is due commercial speech and weighs the competing interests in the specific context of utility advertising. The Note concludes that states may restrict utility advertising to encourage energy conservation.

Note, United States V. Progressive, Inc.: The Faustian Bargain And The First Amendment, Jonathan L. Entin

Faculty Publications

Note discussing United States v. Progressive, Inc.

Federal Communications Commission - Fairness Doctrine - Requirement That A Fairness Doctrine Complaint Establish A Prima Facie Case Defining A Specific Issue, Doris Del Tosto

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.