Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan,
2015
The University of Akron
Constitutional Law - Flag Desecration Statutes - Freedom Of Expression; Parker V. Morgan, Bruce C. Heslop
Akron Law Review
Viewed in its broad perspective, Parker v. Morgan has further clarified and circumscribed the constitutional limits of the state's power to protect the American flag from public acts of desecration. In this respect it may be considered to provide further insight into the constitutional questions involved in this relatively untouched area of the law. However, until authoritative consideration has been given to the nature and source of those protective powers which are reserved to a state, Parker v. Morgan cannot be regarded to have drawn the ultimate lines of demarcation for the constitutional validity of flag desecration statutes. A meaningful …
Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California,
2015
The University of Akron
Obscenity - New First Amendment Standards; Miller V. California, Stacy E. Wolfe
Akron Law Review
It has been over fifteen years since the Supreme Court embarked on its precarious course of determining the Constitutional boundaries for control of obscenity by the state and federal governments. The Court's first attempt to define the meaning of obscenity and ultimately determine the Constitutional protection afforded this expression was in Roth v. United States. What has followed can only be characterized as a series of irreconcilable conflicts and discrepancies that have left the law in this area in total confusion. Recently, the Court in Miller v. California has again attempted to provide "concrete guidelines to isolate 'hard core' pornography …
Chipping Away At The First Amendment: Newspapermen Must Disclose Sources,
2015
The University of Akron
Chipping Away At The First Amendment: Newspapermen Must Disclose Sources, Michael F. Buchicchio
Akron Law Review
This Comment will explore the background and history of the journalistic privilege in light of case law and early constitutional argument. It will analyze the recent Supreme Court decisions denying a privilege to newsmen to conceal their sources, and attempt to explain how this privilege can best be maintained.
Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue,
2015
The University of Akron
Obscenity - Liquor Regulations; California V. Larue, Richard Bernstein
Akron Law Review
The state has the power to regulate the distribution of liquor and enforce health and safety regulations, but the state may not broadly stifle First Amendment freedoms when doing so. "The breath of legislative abridgement must be viewed in the light of less drastic means for achieving the same basic purpose." s The Court has consistently held that only a compelling state interest in the regulation of a subject within the state's constitutional power to regulate can justify limiting First Amendment freedoms.
The "Compulsory School Attendance" Case: Wisconsin V. Yoder,
2015
The University of Akron
The "Compulsory School Attendance" Case: Wisconsin V. Yoder, Michael Buchicchio
Akron Law Review
It is an important constitutional doctrine that a law generally constitutional "on its face," may be unconstitutional "as applied" in specific instances. The Amish case marks the first occasion that the Court has clearly articulated that exception in favor of a minority religious group. It would appear that compulsory education laws are-"on their face"--within a state's constitutional powers, but under the facts of this case, the First Amendment requires that the Amish be exempt.
Corporations; First Amendment Rights; State Ex Rel Grant V. Brown,
2015
The University of Akron
Corporations; First Amendment Rights; State Ex Rel Grant V. Brown, Theodore David Itzkowitz
Akron Law Review
IN AUGUST 9, 1972 the Relators, Greater Cincinnati Gay Society, tendered articles of incorporation for a non-profit corporation to the Secretary of State of Ohio, under provisions of the Ohio Revised Code. The Secretary of State refused to accept the incorporation papers, however, claiming that the purpose of the group, which was to promote acceptance of homosexuality as a valid life style, was contrary to public policy, since homosexuality was then a criminal act.
A Reappraisal Of The Indigent's Right Of Access To Bankruptcy Proceedings,
2015
The University of Akron
A Reappraisal Of The Indigent's Right Of Access To Bankruptcy Proceedings, Timothy E. Gammon
Akron Law Review
IN 1963, Robert F. Kennedy stated, "To a serious extent, the scales of justice in this country are weighed against the poor"' One year later, the Office of Economic Opportunity was created, which helped balance the scale in some areas by providing legal service programs2 for indigents. Nevertheless, the enormous need of legal service for indigents has not and cannot be met under present programs.' The 1964 legal service program failed to provide money for fees and court costs in judicial and administrative proceedings so petitioners who could not proceed in jorma pauperis were denied access to those proceedings. No …
Proof Of Scienter In Criminal Obscenity Prosecutions,
2015
The University of Akron
Proof Of Scienter In Criminal Obscenity Prosecutions, James P. Edmiston
Akron Law Review
Beginning in 1957 with the landmark case of Roth v. United States, and continuing to the present, the courts and legislatures of this country have embarked on a determined, if somewhat confused, effort to prove Milton wrong. The social demand for the enactment and strict enforcement of obscenity laws, designed to remove both the material and its purveyors from society, has placed an enormous burden on the courts, which are charged with interpreting the vagaries of this country's obscenity laws as well as balancing the need for control of obscenity with constitutional freedoms.
The Control Of Seditious Libel As A Basis For The Development Of The Law Of Obscenity,
2015
The University of Akron
The Control Of Seditious Libel As A Basis For The Development Of The Law Of Obscenity, Ronald W. Eades
Akron Law Review
In the United States there are government controls of at least two types of press, seditious libel and obscenity. Even though the first amendment protects speech and press, libels against the government and obscenity have not been given free reign, and have been consistently controlled. Although the conflicts over seditious libel aided the development of current standards of freedom of the press, the controls of obscenity have not yet completed that development and are inconsistent with those first amendment standards.
Freedom Of Unspoken Speech: Implied Defamation And Its Constitutional Limitations,
2015
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
Freedom Of Unspoken Speech: Implied Defamation And Its Constitutional Limitations, Julie M. Capie
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Difficulty Of Balancing The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint With The Right Of Privacy,
2015
Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center
The Difficulty Of Balancing The Doctrine Of Prior Restraint With The Right Of Privacy, Bridgette Nunez
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Prohibition Of Indoctrination In Education — A Look At The Cse Law Of The European Court Of Human Rights,
2015
Brigham Young University Law School
Prohibition Of Indoctrination In Education — A Look At The Cse Law Of The European Court Of Human Rights, Fernando Méndez Powell
Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Freedom Of Speech In Schools And The Right To Participation: When The First Amendment Encounters The Convention On The Rights Of The Child,
2015
Brigham Young University Law School
Freedom Of Speech In Schools And The Right To Participation: When The First Amendment Encounters The Convention On The Rights Of The Child, Lotem Perry-Hazan
Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Mergens V. Westside Community Schools At Twenty-Five And Christian Legal Society V. Martinez: From Live And Let Live To My Way Or The Highway?,
2015
Brigham Young University Law School
Mergens V. Westside Community Schools At Twenty-Five And Christian Legal Society V. Martinez: From Live And Let Live To My Way Or The Highway?, Charles J. Russo
Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Real-Time Sports Data And The First Amendment,
2015
University of Washington School of Law
Real-Time Sports Data And The First Amendment, Ryan M. Rodenberg, John T. Holden, Asa D. Brown
Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts
Technological advancements have created an emergent challenge for organizations attempting to monetize real-time information. Real-time data as a commodity is especially relevant in the sports industry. Sports leagues increasingly seek to control the dissemination of real-time data in conjunction with lucrative distribution agreements. We analyze the legal status of real-time sports data under both intellectual property law and the First Amendment, with our case-by-case analysis extending to spectators, gamblers, journalists, and non-gambling entrepreneurs. Although we conclude that the First Amendment protections are broad across all four categories, particularly when the underlying sporting event takes place on public land, we find …
Side Effects: State Anti-Fraud Statutes, Off-Label Marketing, And The Solvable Challenge Of Causation,
2015
Mercer University School of Law
Side Effects: State Anti-Fraud Statutes, Off-Label Marketing, And The Solvable Challenge Of Causation, Isaac D. Buck
Cardozo Law Review
While the American public remains preoccupied with the lurching implementation of the Affordable Care Act, the regulation of pharmaceutical companies for their off-label marketing and promotion of drugs features a regulatory environment within the health industry that seems to be in wild flux. Following the Second Circuit's decision in United States v. Caronia, commentators and providers are unsure about the future of federal regulation in this area, with the FDA seeking to minimize the opinion and pharmaceutical companies celebrating its impact. Much of the understandably spirited reaction to the Caronia case has omitted a discussion of the relevant and …
First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States,
2015
The University of Akron
First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Obscenity; Pinkus V. United States, Cary Douglass Caesa
Akron Law Review
“In its latest attempt to define a workable standard for obscenity rulings, the United States Supreme Court has held that children may not be included in a court's instruction as to the social group to whom the material would or would not be obscene. However, the Court held that sensitive persons and deviant groups may be included without unduly lowering the threshold of a finding of obscenity. Thus, Pinkus v. United States clarified the "community" whose judgment should define obscenity.”
First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato,
2015
The University of Akron
First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Commerical Speech And Advertising; Metpath, Inc. V. Imperato, Sheryl S. Kantz
Akron Law Review
"The decision of Metpath, Inc. v. Imperato is indicative of the growing trend of the judiciary toward affording "commercial speech" the protective shield of the first amendment. As shown by Metpath, where the concern is advertising by a medical clinic, speech with commercial overtones is afforded protection where a public interest in the subject and content of the speech is demonstrated. However, the perimeters of such protection have not been defined by this or previous decisions."
First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc.,
2015
The University of Akron
First Amendment; Freedom Of The Press; Access Of News Media To County Jail; Houchins V. Kqed, Inc., Thomas W. Renwand
Akron Law Review
"Although United States history is replete with struggles over the rights and prerogatives of the press, until recently these disputes rarely made their way to the nation's highest court.' In the last several years the Supreme Court has been confronted with a number of important, complex questions dealing with the role of a free press in a free society.'"
First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation,
2015
The University of Akron
First Amendment; Freedom Of Speech; Broadcasting; Obscenity; Fcc V. Pacifica Foundation, James E. Moliterno
Akron Law Review
“ ‘I was thinking about the curse words and the swear words, the cuss L words and the words you can't say . . .the words you couldn't say on the public, ah, airwaves... the ones that will curve your spine [and] grow hair on your hands ....’ While this is the satiric opinion of George Carlin, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a bare majority of the United States Supreme Court have embraced it as their genuine opinion.' They have decided to protect the public from the fate of hearing Carlin's social criticism regarding seven ‘dirty’ words.”
