Law and Society Commons^™

Municipality Of Bayamón V. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2025): Bringing Racketeering Charges For Climate Justice, Ilinca C. Johnson

Pace Environmental Law Review

Environmental justice communities should have their climate change damages heard in the courtroom. One means to increase environmental justice claims is through claims under the federal Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Using Municipality of Bayamón v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2025) as a model, this Article suggests a novel RICO case strategy to pursue climate damages for marginalized communities. Fundamentally, environmental justice RICO claims involve careful case design based on the climate-related damages a marginalized community has faced because of the long-term deception by fossil fuel actors upon those communities. Pursuing such claims forwards the intersectional issues faced by …

First Amendment Forum Classification: Special Use Permits, Limited Public Forums, And The “Heckler’S Veto”, Elizabeth Price Foley

University of Miami Law Review

Pride Month is an important event in many communities because it celebrates and enhances the visibility of the LGBTQ+ community. Pridefest events occurring during Pride Month are well-attended but often mired by threats of violence. Such threats are often targeted at Pridefest drag shows, which exhibit gender-bending performances by drag queens and drag kings of one biological sex, who wear extravagant costumes that exaggerate gender stereotypes of the opposite biological sex. In Naples Pride, Inc. v. City of Naples, the Eleventh Circuit addressed whether a government may impose conditions on such drag shows when threats have been levied against …

Let Them Hear It: Peaceful Protests Near The Homes Of Supreme Court Justices, Srikanth Reddy

Lewis & Clark Law Review

All of us—not just attorneys and politicians—need to be more critical and skeptical of the Supreme Court. Criticism by ordinary people is good and appropriate, even if it hurts the Justices’ feelings. That includes public protests. When a case matters enough to them, members of the public can and should criticize the Court and its Justices, including by peacefully gathering and protesting near a Justice’s home, or when a Justice appears out in the world.

Health Truth To Power: Professional Collaboration To Bolster Trust Against Misinformation, William M. Sage, Keegan D. Warren

Faculty Scholarship

This Article is about health, leaving aside more general challenges to shared civic information today. The Article begins by surveying the principal challenges for health information in post-pandemic, arguably post-truth America, and then describes briefly the sources and limits of medical professional authority. Noting the double-edged sword of free speech guarantees under the U.S. Constitution, the Article continues by commenting on speaking truth to government, to industry, and to the crowd. Next, the Article considers the physicians’ role in speaking truth to power from the perspective of standard medical professional ethics and identity, comparing it to that of lawyers. Finally, …

Disclosures, Disclaimers, And Disinformation Advertising, Areeb Asif

Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy

Every regular internet user in the United States has been exposed to fake news at some point. Most of them, if not all, would agree that this problem needs a solution. Nevertheless, even as fake news has taken on unforeseen prominence in recent years, very little concrete action has been taken to curb its impact on American society. Some scholars have chalked this up to the Supreme Court’s expansive conception of the First Amendment, which makes it incredibly challenging to regulate political speech. Others posit that the problem is Section 230, which allows platforms to profit from fake news without …

Holding Up A Mirror To Hostile Gender Legislation: The Impact Of Drag Bans On The Theater Industry, Claire B. Epstein

Pace Law Review

States, particularly infringing upon the rights of the LGBTQIA+ community. Certain states have sought to introduce “drag ban” laws under the guise of protecting children from viewing obscene content. These laws, in effect, are harmful to people, children especially, and have a chilling effect on expression, leaving critical harm in their wake. Laws such as these cast a wide net of regulation, opening up otherwise innocent citizens to criminal and civil liability. The theater industry is particularly affected by these regulations, even if lawmakers do not acknowledge this potential harm. This article will focus on three laws seeking to regulate …

Beyond The Ivy League: Stopping The Spread Of Antisemitism On American Campuses: Hearing Before The H. Comm. On Educ. & The Workforce, 119th Cong., May 7, 2025 (Statement Of David D. Cole), David Cole

Testimony Before Congress

In this testimony, submitted to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce for a hearing on antisemitism on campus, I sought to offer a legal framework for considering antisemitic speech on campus. The testimony cautions against equating criticism of Israel with antisemitism. But more importantly, it notes that even where speech is actually antisemitic, it is generally protected by the First Amendment (and therefore also protected by private university policies that protect free speech on campus). Title VI of the Civil Rights Act does not prohibit antisemitic speech, even virulently antisemitic speech. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of …

When Can A Lawyer Lawfully Use Threats When Negotiating?, James M. Fischer

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

This Article focuses upon a basic negotiation device—a threat, used in a particular context—threats contained in settlement demand letters. In some, but not all, cases, however, the threat may be deemed a crime (extortion), in which case, the lawyer may be subject to sanction (criminal or civil liability, professional discipline) for making the threat. This consequence has, however, been largely ignored in academic literature. That is unfortunate, for it appears that many lawyers are unaware of the risks negotiation threats present because the risk is not well defined in the professional codes lawyers would normally look to for guidance.

This …

The Waiting Is The Hardest Part: The Constitutionality Of Firearm Waiting Periods, F. Lee Francis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This Article examines the constitutionality of firearm waiting period laws through the lens of the Supreme Court’s evolving Second Amendment jurisprudence. Although such laws are frequently defended as prudent public safety measures, their validity turns not on legislative purpose but on constitutional principle, particularly as framed in District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen.

Under those decisions, the scope of the Second Amendment is determined not by judicial balancing of contemporary interests, but by reference to the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The Article surveys that tradition and finds no …

Civil Rights V The First Amendment, And The Erosion Of The Belief–Action Dichotomy, Elena Lacorte

University of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporate Governance Speech, Sarah C. Haan

Seattle University Law Review

The State has always regulated the intra-firm communications that make corporate governance possible, most commonly by mandating disclosures of information by a corporation to its shareholders. Some such laws are labeled “securities regulation,” but securities regulation is a broad category that extends to speech by actors who are outside the corporate enterprise as well. Also, the conventional securities regulation category does not capture all such laws; other examples, including informationforcing mandates, can be found in state corporate law. This Article uses the term “corporate governance speech” to describe the communications among shareholders, directors, and officers through which corporate governance is …

How The Antidiscrimination Law Of Commercial Transactions Really Works, Helen Norton

Seattle University Law Review

A variety of businesses now cite 303 Creative when seeking First Amendment protection for their refusal to serve certain customers based on those customers’ protected class status. How this litigation will play out remains to be seen. But future courts need not, and should not, repeat the 303 Creative Court’s misunderstanding of how the antidiscrimination law of commercial transactions actually works.

Part I of this Essay explains the Court’s longstanding understanding of the antidiscrimination law of commercial transactions, and then describes the Court’s failure to engage with this precedent in 303 Creative. Part II then identifies the 303 Creative decision’s …

Incitement, Enthusiasm, And The Dangers Of Negligent Protest, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article explores the murky line between protected speech and assembly on the one hand, and harmful incitement on the other. On the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Oliver Wendell Holmes’s dissent in Gitlow v. New York, it explores Holmes’s famous dictum that “every idea is an incitement” as a conceptual starting point. By analyzing the relational and temporal dynamics between speaker and listener, the Article highlights how meaning and effect are often shaped by the listener’s agency and other circumstances beyond the control of the speaker. Two contemporary cases illustrate these dynamics. The first is the Fifth Circuit …

Brief Of First Amendment And Internet Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Tiktok Inc. V. Garland, No. 24-656 (U.S. 2025)., Shubhangi Agarwalla, Enrique Armijo, Kevin Bankston, Susan Benesch, Ashutosh Bhagwat, Stuart N. Brotman, Ryan Calo, Anupam Chander, Erwin Chemerinsky, Alan K. Chen, David Craig, Eric Goldman, Gregory Gondwe, James Grimmelmann, Nikolas Guggenberger, G.S. Hans, Robert A. Heverly, Thomas E. Kadri, David Kaye, Heidi Kitrosser, Vivek Krishnamurthy, Edward Lee, Mark A. Lemley, David S. Levine, Yvette Joy Liebesman, Gregory P. Magarian, Jess Miers, Sean O’Brien, Mary-Rose Papandrea, Kermit Roosevelt, Jennifer Safstrom, Pamela Samuelson, Madhavi Sunder, Christopher Jon Sprigman, Jordi Weinstock

Con Law Center Amicus Briefs

“Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom, and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” Benjamin Franklin, Silence Dogwood, No. 8 (July 9, 1722). For this reason, the U.S. Constitution makes clear that the Government cannot abridge free speech based on its content or viewpoint absent compelling and narrowly tailored grounds. Indeed, the protection of all speech is foundational to American democracy. See United States v. Schwimmer, 279 U.S. 644, 654–55 (1929) (Holmes, J., dissenting) (“[I]f there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other …

Regulating Social Media Through Family Law, Katharine B. Silbaugh, Adi Caplan-Bricker

Faculty Scholarship

Social media afflicts minors with depression, anxiety, sleeplessness, addiction, suicidality, and eating disorders. States are legislating at a breakneck pace to protect children. Courts strike down every attempt to intervene on First Amendment grounds. This Article clears a path through this stalemate by leveraging two underappreciated frameworks: the latent regulatory power of parental authority arising out of family law, and a hidden family law within First Amendment jurisprudence. These two projects yield novel insights. First, the recent cases offer a dangerous understanding of the First Amendment, one that should not survive the family law reasoning we provide. First Amendment jurisprudence …

Secrecy On Steroids: How Overzealous State Confidentiality Laws Expose Leakers And Whistleblowers To Retaliatory Prosecution, Frank D. Lomonte, Anne Marie Tamburro

University of Miami Law Review

It is well-documented that the federal government has a secrecy problem. Thousands of times a year, inconsequential documents are needlessly stamped “classified,” which can mean prison for anyone who leaks them. But the addiction to secrecy doesn’t stop with the Pentagon. State public-records statutes are riddled with their own local version of “classified information” that puts people at risk of prosecution even for well-intentioned whistleblowing.

The problem is particularly acute in Florida, where one of the state’s highest-ranking elected officials spent almost two years as the target of a criminal investigation for releasing records about an unresolved sexual harassment complaint …

Obtaining Trademark Registration For Marks Containing Political Commentary: A Look Into Vidal V. Elster, Annick Runyon

University of Miami Law Review

For decades, courts have struggled with balancing trademark law with the First Amendment—specifically with cases challenging the denial of trademark registration of certain marks. Congress codified trademark registration through the Lanham Act, also known as the Trademark Act of 1946. This statute outlines the registration process and expands the rights of trademark owners. In recent years, a string of cases have ruled certain provisions of the Lanham Act that bar certain marks from registration unconstitutional.

Currently under review by the Supreme Court, the case Vidal v. Elster involves an applicant who was denied trademark registration for his mark “Trump Too …

Anti-Antisemitism Now, Lili Levi

University of Miami Law Review

On May 25, 2023, the Biden Administration released The U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism—America’s first national strategy of this kind. In early November 2023, the White House announced the establishment of the first-ever U.S. National Strategy to Counter Islamophobia. These historic commitments respond to increases in identity-based bias incidents and expression against Jews and Muslims. Antisemitic incidents, which were already rising even before the pandemic, increased by almost 400% since the start of the Israel-Hamas war. The war also triggered a sharp upturn in Islamophobic incidents in the U.S., including the shooting of three college students and …

The Impossibility Of Corporate Political Ideology: Upholding Sec Climate Disclosures Against Compelled Commercial Speech Challenges, Erin Murphy

Northwestern University Law Review

To address the increasingly dire climate crisis, the SEC will require public companies to reveal their business’s environmental impact to the market through climate disclosures. Businesses and states challenged the required disclosures as compelled, politically motivated speech that risks putting First Amendment doctrine into further jeopardy. In the past five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has demonstrated an increased propensity to hear compelled speech cases and rule in favor of litigants claiming First Amendment protection from disclosing information that they disagree with or believe to be a politically charged topic. Dissenting liberal Justices have decried these practices as “weaponizing the …

The Antidote Of Free Speech: Censorship During The Pandemic, Christopher Keleher

Catholic University Law Review

Free speech in America stands at a precipice. The nation must decide if the First Amendment protects controversial, unconventional, and unpopular speech, or only that which is mainstream, fashionable, and government-approved. This debate is one of many legal battles brought to the fore during Covid-19. But the fallout of the free speech question will transcend Covid-19.

During the pandemic, the federal government took unprecedented steps to pressure private entities to push messages it approved and squelch those it did not. The Supreme Court will soon grapple with the issue of censorship during the pandemic. This article examines this litigation, along …

The Jawboning Cases End With A Bang Disguised By A Whimper, Derek E. Bambauer

UF Law Faculty Publications

Jawboning is government enforcement through informal channels, where the underlying authority is in doubt. Government actors at all levels have increasingly deployed this tactic to pressure Internet platforms to suppress disfavored speech. Internet jawboning debuted at the Supreme Court in two cases (National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo and Murthy v. Missouri) in 2023. Although the Court disposed of both cases on procedural and standing grounds, rather than offering a new methodology for evaluating jawboning, the opinions offer examples of what a successful jawboning claim looks like and what an unsuccessful claim lacks. Thus, jawboning as a …

American Star Chamber: Online Misinformation, Government Intervention, And The Intellectual Matrix Of The First Amendment, Emily E. Burton

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

Just as monarchs and clerical authorities struggled to respond to seditious and heretical writings enabled by the invention of the printing press, twenty-first century governments are experiencing a similar information revolution as a result of the digital age and a rising tide of what the United States has labeled online misinformation. Like the printing press, the Internet has enabled the spread of information at an exponentially lower cost and an exponentially higher speed as it extends the ability to publish thoughts and opinions to an increasingly diverse array of individuals. Although this was largely celebrated during the first two decades …

Beyond Social Media Analogues, Gregory M. Dickinson

Faculty Articles

The steady flow of social-media cases toward the Supreme Court shows a nation reworking its fundamental relationship with technology. The cases raise a host of questions ranging from difficult to impossible: how to nurture a vibrant public square when a few tech giants dominate the flow of information, how social media can be at the same time free from conformist groupthink and also protected against harmful disinformation campaigns, and how government and industry can cooperate on such problems without devolving toward censorship.

To such profound questions, this Essay offers a comparatively modest contribution—what not to do. Always the lawyer’s instinct …

The First Amendment To The Constitution, Associational Freedom, And The Future Of The Country: Alabama’S Direct Attack On The Existence Of The Naacp, Helen J. Knowles-Gardner

Seattle University Law Review

Sixty years ago, on Wednesday, April 8, 1964, Professor Harry Kalven, Jr., gave the second of three lectures at The Ohio State University College of Law Forum. These lectures were published two years later in a book entitled The Negro & the 1st Amendment. In the second lecture, Kalven distinguished between direct and indirect threats to the associational freedom of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Kalven categorized the 1958 decision in NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson as an indirect effort to control the NAACP.

With the benefit of material obtained from numerous archival sources, …

The News Media Engagement Principle: Why Social Media Has Not Actually Overrun The Limited Purpose Public Figure Category, Zachary R. Cormier

University of Miami Law Review

Has the rise of social media ruined the limited purpose public figure category of the First Amendment’s actual malice privilege? Justice Gorsuch believes so—and he has recently invited courts to get rid of it. He argues that the category now includes vast numbers of otherwise private citizens that have “become ‘public figures’ on social media overnight.” With so many people qualifying as limited purpose public figures (and having to overcome the actual malice standard to prevail on a defamation claim), he claims that the category has evolved to provide an unjustified shield for the masses of misinformation-peddlers on social media. …

For Freedom Or Full Of It? State Attempts To Silence Social Media, Grace Slicklen

University of Miami Law Review

Freedom of speech is, unsurprisingly, foundational to the “land of the free.” However, the “land of the free” has undergone some changes since the First Amendment’s ratification. Unprecedented technological evolution has ushered in a digital forum in which the volume, speed, and reach of words transcend the Framers’ visions of the First Amendment’s aims. Social media platforms have become central spaces for public discourse, where opportunities to create—and repress—speech are endless. From enabling individuals to freely express their views, to allowing state actors to limit open exchanges, it is about time that the Supreme Court tackles this complex issue of …

Public Accommodations Originalism’S Inability To Solve The Problems Of Online Content Moderation, Vincent A. Marrazzo

St. Mary's Law Journal

In response to online platforms’ increasing ability to moderate content in what often seems to be an arbitrary way, Justice Clarence Thomas recently suggested that platforms should be regulated as public accommodations such that the government could prevent platforms from banning users or removing posts from their sites. Shortly thereafter, Florida passed the Transparency in Technology Act, which purported to regulate online platforms as public accommodations and restricted their ability to ban users, tailor content through algorithmic decision-making, and engage in their own speech. Texas followed suit by passing a similar law, and Arizona debated a bill purporting to regulate …

Reckless Associations, Jane R. Bambauer, Saura Masconale, Simone M. Sepe

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article provides a theoretical foundation and practical guide for a new form of liability that has proven necessary in the Internet era: the tort of Reckless Association. This tort would hold de facto leaders of informal networks responsible when radicalized members of the network cause physical harm to others. Recent prosecutions of the leaders of the Oath Keepers and other white supremacists who organized the Charlottesville protest, and rumblings of a similar prosecution against Donald Trump, demonstrate that there is a public appetite for this form of legal responsibility. To date, these prosecutions proceed on theories of incitement or …

First Amendment Protections For "Good Trouble", Dawn C. Nunziato

Emory Law Journal

In the classical era of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, activists and protestors sought to march, demonstrate, stage sit-ins, speak up, and denounce the system of racial oppression in our country. This was met not just by counterspeech—the preferred response within our constitutional framework—but also by efforts by the dominant power structure to censor and shut down those forms of public rebuke of our nation’s racist practices. Fast forward seventy years, and the tactics of the dominant power structure have essentially remained the same in response to today’s civil rights activists who seek to protest …

A Pleasure To Burn: How First Amendment Jurisprudence On Book Banning Bolsters White Supremacy, Amy Anderson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.