First Amendment Commons^™

Religion And Social Coherentism, Nelson Tebbe

Notre Dame Law Review

Today, prominent academics are questioning the very possibility of a theory of free exercise or non-establishment. They argue that judgments in the area can only be conclusory or irrational. In contrast to such skeptics, this Essay argues that decisionmaking on questions of religious freedom can be morally justified. Two arguments constitute the Essay. Part I begins by acknowledging that skepticism has power. The skeptics rightly identify some inevitable indeterminacy, but they mistakenly argue that it necessarily signals decisionmaking that is irrational or unjustified. Their critique is especially striking because the skeptics’ prudential way of working on concrete problems actually shares …

Doric Columns Are Not Falling: Wedding Cakes, The Ministerial Exception, And The Public-Private Distinction, James M. Oleske Jr.

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Privacy Almost Won: Time, Inc. V. Hill (1967), Samantha Barbas

Journal Articles

Drawing on previously unexplored and unpublished archival papers of Richard Nixon, the plaintiffs’ lawyer in the case, and the justices of the Warren Court, this article tells the story of the seminal First Amendment case Time, Inc. v. Hill (1967). In Hill, the Supreme Court for the first time addressed the conflict between the right to privacy and freedom of the press. The Court constitutionalized tort liability for invasion of privacy, acknowledging that it raised First Amendment issues and must be governed by constitutional standards. Hill substantially diminished privacy rights; today it is difficult if not impossible to recover against …

Telescoping And Collectivizing Religious Free Exercise Rights, Henry L. Chambers Jr

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Posner, Blackstone, And Prior Restraints On Speech, Ashutosh Bhagwat

BYU Law Review

Judge Richard Posner recently asserted that the original understanding of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment was to prohibit “censorship”—meaning prior restraints—but not subsequent punishments. Posner was following in the footsteps of many other eminent jurists including Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Joseph Story, James Wilson, and ultimately William Blackstone.

The problem is, this claim is simply wrong. Firstly, it misquotes Blackstone. Blackstone said that the liberty of the press meant only freedom from prior restraints; he never discussed speech. When one does examine the Speech Clause, it becomes quite clear that its protections cannot be limited to freedom …

The Influence Of Setting On Supreme Court Religious Expression Decisions, Joseph J. Hemmer Jr.

Communication and Theater Association of Minnesota Journal

The First Amendment prohibits any establishment of religion, a dicta that has been applied in an apparently inconsistent manner by the Supreme Court when called upon to evaluate various forms of verbal and nonverbal religious communication. Court decisions have approved religious prayers and displays in government settings. When such exercises and displays were introduced to the public school academic setting, the Court chose to disallow the practice. An examination of judicial opinions reveals that justices recognize three factors inherent to the academic setting which justify the apparently contradictory decisions. Because of the captive nature of the audience, the presence of …

Trending @ Rwu Law: Mikela Almeida's Post: Esther Clark Competition Held In R. I. Supreme Court, Mikela Almeida

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.

Noriega V. Activision/Blizzard: The First Amendment Right To Use A Historical Figure's Likeness In Video Games, Joshua Sinclair

Duke Law & Technology Review

Panama’s former dictator, Manuel Noriega, recently sued Activision Blizzard in the California Superior Court for using his likeness and image in the popular video game “Call of Duty: Black Ops II.” In his complaint, Noriega alleged that the use of his likeness violated his right of publicity. Former New York Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, came to Activision’s defense, and filed a motion to dismiss, which was granted. In granting Activision’s motion, the court held that Activision’s use of Noriega’s likeness was transformative and did not violate his right of publicity. This Issue Brief argues that the California Superior Court should not …

Law, Religion, And Politics: Understanding The Separation Of Church And State, Richard Garnett

Faculty Workshops

Professor Richard Garnett, of University of Notre Dame Law School, presented on the topic Law, Religion, and Politics: Understanding the Separation of Church and State. This workshop was presented as part of the Hesburgh Lecture Series through the Alumni & Friends of University of Notre Dame and was co-sponsored by the Notre Dame Alumni Club of Miami. This workshop examined how to understand the Constitution's "separation of church and state" and what it requires of religious believers and institutions.

Can You Understand This Message? An Examination Of Hurley V. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Group Of Boston's Impact On Spence V. Washington, Sandy Tomasik

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note analyzes the effect that Hurley had on the Spence factors and suggests that the particularized requirement has been lowered. This is the best approach to encouraging speech while balancing other important interests. Part I discusses the development of the freedom of speech, from protecting the spoken and written word to protecting expressive conduct. Part II outlines the different approaches taken by the circuit courts in deciding whether conduct is protected as speech and, in particular, what effect Hurley had on Spence. Part III critically analyzes each of these approaches and concludes that the Eleventh Circuit’s approach …

A Benign Prior Restraint Rule For Public School Classroom Speech, Scott R. Bauries

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article is a contribution to a symposium on schools and free speech. It advances the claim that the First Amendment doctrines that apply to the classroom should adopt a benign prior restraint rule. In the case of teacher classroom speech, the Garcetti rule should apply where the government’s action in interfering with the speech constitutes a prior restraint—the First Amendment should not reach such interference. In cases where a teacher first speaks and then is later punished for that speech, however, basic notions of due process and the dangers of arbitrary governmental decision making are far more pressing, and …

Religion And Social Coherentism, Nelson Tebbe

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Today, prominent academics are questioning the very possibility of a theory of free exercise or non-establishment. They argue that judgments in the area can only be conclusory or irrational. In contrast to such skeptics, this Essay argues that decisionmaking on questions of religious freedom can be morally justified. Two arguments constitute the Essay. Part I begins by acknowledging that skepticism has power. The skeptics rightly identify some inevitable indeterminacy, but they mistakenly argue that it necessarily signals decisionmaking that is irrational or unjustified. Their critique is especially striking because the skeptics’ prudential way of working on concrete problems actually shares …

High Value Lies, Ugly Truths, And The First Amendment, Alan K. Chen, Justin Marceau

Vanderbilt Law Review

Lying has a complicated relationship with the First Amendment. It is beyond question that some lies-such as perjury and fraud-are simply not covered by the Constitution's free speech clause.' But it is equally clear that some lies, even intentionally lying about military honors, are entitled to First Amendment protection. Until very recently, however, it has been taken for granted in Supreme Court doctrine and academic writing that any constitutional protection for lies is purely prophylactic-it provides protection to the truth-speaker by also incidentally protecting the liar. What remains unresolved is whether other rationales might also justify First Amendment protection for …

Regulating Drones Under The First And Fourth Amendments, Marc Jonathan Blitz, James Grimsley, Stephen E. Henderson, Joseph Thai

William & Mary Law Review

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requires the Federal Aviation Administration to integrate unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, into the national airspace system by September 2015. Yet perhaps because of their chilling accuracy in targeted killings abroad, perhaps because of an increasing consciousness of diminishing privacy more generally, and perhaps simply because of a fear of the unknown, divergent UAV-restrictive legislation has been proposed in Congress and enacted in a number of states. Given UAV utility and cost-effectiveness over a vast range of tasks, however, widespread commercial use ultimately seems certain. Consequently, it is imperative to understand …

2015 Esther Clark Moot Court Competition: Finals, Roger Williams University School Of Law

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

#Tweeting For Terrorism: First Amendment Implications In Using Proterrorist Tweets To Convict Under The Material Support Statute, Abigail M. Pierce

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

"Shouting 'Fire' In A Theater": The Life And Times Of Constitutional Law's Most Enduring Analogy, Carlton F.W. Larson

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In 1919, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes introduced the specter of a man falsely shouting “fire” in a theater into First Amendment law. Nearly one hundred years later, this remains the most enduring analogy in constitutional law. It has been relied on in hundreds of constitutional cases, and it has permeated popular discourse on the scope of individual rights.

This Article examines both the origins and the later life of Holmes’s theater analogy. Part I is a detective story, seeking to solve the mystery of how Holmes came up with this particular example. This story takes us to the forgotten world …

A New Test To Reconcile The Right Of Publicity With Core First Amendment Values, Nat Stern, Mark Joseph Stern

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Network Neutrality And The First Amendment, Andrew Patrick, Eric Scharphorn

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The First Amendment reflects the conviction that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to public welfare. Like the printing press, the Internet has dramatically transformed the marketplace of ideas by providing unprecedented opportunities for individuals to communicate. Though its growth continues to be phenomenal, broadband service providers— acting as Internet gatekeepers—have developed the ability to discriminate against specific content and applications. First, these gatekeepers intercept and inspect data transferred over public networks, then selectively block or slow it. This practice has the potential to stifle the Internet’s value as a speech platform by …

Abuse And Harassment Diminish Free Speech, Anita Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.