First Amendment Commons^™

In-Corp-O-Real: A Psychological Critique Of Corporate Personhood And Citizens United, Teneille R. Brown

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

It seems absurd today that a robot’s political speech could ever warrant First Amendment protection. And yet, fifty years ago the same claim regarding corporations would have seemed equally absurd. But here we are, with anthropomorphized corporations enjoying political free speech rights equal to ordinary human beings. While corporations are constitutional people and robots presently are not, it is not obvious that this will, or should, remain this way forever. In the not-too-distant future, robots will more closely resemble human beings in appearance and function. When — not if — this happens, how will courts distinguish corporations from robots for …

Roe's Race: The Supreme Court Decision, Legal History, And The Racial Politics Of Abortion, Mary Ziegler

Scholarly Publications

Questions of race and abortion have shaped current legal debates about defunding Planned Parenthood and banning race-selection abortion. In these discussions, abortion opponents draw a close connection between the eugenic or population-control movements of the twentieth century and the contemporary abortion-rights movement. In challenging legal restrictions on abortion, abortion-rights activists generally insist that their movement and its predecessors have primarily privileged reproductive choice.

Notwithstanding the centrality of race to abortion politics, there has been no meaningful history of the racial politics of abortion that produced or followed Roe v. Wade. This Article bridges this gap in the abortion discussion by …

Lawyers, Clients, And Constitutional Rights, Jason Mazzone

Utah OnLaw: The Utah Law Review Online Supplement

Professor Tarkington’s achievement is to show that associational freedom should encompass lawyering. With that, her article should have considerable impact on academic and judicial accounts of associational rights. In practice, however, the impact is likely to come in terms of protections for the ability of organizations to engage counsel—the right to client-attorney association—rather than, as in her focus, on a right that belongs to and is exercised by attorneys.

Inflammatory Speech: Outrage Versus Intimidation, Alexander Tsesis

Faculty Publications & Other Works

No abstract provided.

Do Graphic Tobacco Warnings Violate The First Amendment?, Nathan Cortez

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

When Congress passed the nation’s first comprehensive tobacco bill in 2009, it replaced the familiar Surgeon General’s warnings, last updated in 1984, with nine blunter warnings. The law also directed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ('FDA') to require color graphics to accompany the textual warnings. By law, the warnings would cover the top fifty percent of the front and back of tobacco packaging and the top twenty percent of print advertisements, bringing the United States closer to many peer countries that now require graphic warnings. Tobacco companies challenged the requirement on First Amendment grounds, arguing that the compelled disclosures …

Freedom Of Expression In Post-Soviet Russia, Jeffrey D. Kahn

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This Article assesses the freedom of expression in Russia and prospects for its future: what has the Russian state promised its citizens, in what legal forms have those promises been made, and how well are those paper promises being kept in practice? The Article considers recent state actions and statutes enacted to regulate speech, association, and other forms of expression, and determines that these are possible because of the very weak separation of powers in the Russian Federation. The Article concludes by looking at the European Convention on Human Rights as one hope for a power capable of exerting influence …

War Of The Words: Why False Statements Should Be Guaranteed First Amendment Protection, Virginia R. Priddy

Georgia Law Review

In Haley v. State, the Georgia Supreme Court upheld
the conviction of Andrew Scott Haley for making a false
statement. Haley created a username and posted videos to
the Internet in which he claimed to have committed a
series of murders, goading his audience to try to solve the
"mysteries." Haley was convicted under a Georgia statute
that proscribes the making of a false statement within the
jurisdiction of an agency or department of state of Georgia.
After discussing the historical legal and philosophical
underpinnings of the First Amendment right to free
speech, this Note argues that the Georgia statute …

Outspoken: Social Media And The Modern College Athlete, 12 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 509 (2013), Meg Penrose

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution grants American citizens the right to free speech. However, in the case of college athletes, this right is not without limitation. In exchange for the privilege of participating in college level athletics, college athletes voluntarily agree to terms that restrict their abilities to speak freely, specifically in the context of social media platforms. This article details situations in which college athletes have made offensive statements via social media for which they later needed to delete, explain, and apologize. These examples support the notion that restrictions on college athletes’ speech are not only …

Walking The Executive Speech Tightrope: From Starbucks To Chick-Fil-A, Loren F. Selznick

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tinker Takes On Tatro: The Minnesota Supreme Court's Missed Opportunity, Tracey Wirmani

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Free Speech, Fair Election, And Campaign Finance Laws: Can They Co-Exist?, Joel Gora

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Law, Religion, And Culture Intertwined: A Case Study In The Development Of American Jewish Law, Mark Goldfeder

Scholarly Works

Law and religion share an underlying structure built on commandments and corresponding commitments. They also share a space in the formal regulation of a person's daily life. Oftentimes, they attempt to legislate in the same specific areas, and oftentimes they come to different final conclusions, or to similar conclusions, but for very different reasons. This article explores the concept of child support in Jewish and American law, respectively, noting how the standards that Jewish law courts impose are actually governed by the hybrid and sometimes competing claims of religious law, secular law, and contemporary cultural norms. In some times and …

Is Prayer Constitutional At Municipal Council Meetings?, Thomas A. Schweitzer

Scholarly Works

The author discusses Galloway v. Town of Greece, a case which challenges official prayers at town council meetings. To provide the necessary background information for understanding the issues in Galloway, the author begins with a brief discussion of two other cases, Lemon v. Kurtzman and Marsh v. Chambers. The author then examines the district and circuit court decisions in Galloway and the Establishment Clause issues posed by the case. Next, the author notes issues raised by other lower court decisions involving legislative prayer after Marsh.

Towards the end of the article, to clarify and decide the constitutional issues, the author …

Emerging Technologies And Dwindling Speech, Jorge Roig

Scholarly Works

Inspired in part by the recent holding in Bland v. Roberts that the use of the “Like” feature in Facebook is not covered by the Free Speech Clause, this article makes a brief foray into the approach that courts have taken in the recent past towards questions of First Amendment coverage in the context of emerging technologies. Specifically, this article will take a closer look at how courts have dealt with the issue of functionality in the context of First Amendment coverage of computer source code. The analysis of this and other recent experiences, when put in a larger context, …

No Jokes About Dope: Morse V. Frederick's Educational Rationale, Emily Gold Waldman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This piece begins with a “protective” reading of Morse v. Frederick, showing how this rationale provides a good starting point in understanding Morse but is ultimately incomplete. Indeed, Justice Stevens’ dissent is largely an argument that the protective rationale falls short here. I then re-examine Morse from the perspective of the educational rationale and conclude that the underlying, largely unstated premise of the Morse majority is that schools—as part of teaching students about the gravity of drug use—should be able to convey disapproval of messages suggesting that drug use is a joking or trivial matter. This helps to explain why …

Using Feathery Birds To Disguise Hateful Speech: Avatar, Hillary: The Movie, Citizens United, And How Birds Of The Same Feather Flock Together, Angela Mae Kupenda

Journal Articles

Some types of hateful speech may be called commercialism or entertainment. Yet, this speech disguises hate. This speech seems to be harmless entertainment, as harmless as doves or feathery birds. However, in reality this speech drowns out the truth in the marketplace, as individuals appear to become more gullible in watching film and other commercial speech. This essay explores this quandary by asking, and attempting to answer, four questions. First, is there any possible negative influence from commercial media, especially film, in the marketplace of ideas about nonwhites (i.e., has the truth about race and about nonwhites already won out …

Child Sexualization In The Media: A Need For Reform, Punam Panchal Alam

Student Works

No abstract provided.

The Tools Of Political Dissent: A First Amendment Guide To Fun Registries, Thomas E. Kadri

Articles

No abstract provided.

"Smut And Nothing But": The Fcc, Indecency, And Regulatory Transformations In The Shadows, Lili Levi

Articles

No abstract provided.

Can We Please Stop Talking About Neutrality? Koppelman Between Scalia And Rawls, Chad W. Flanders

All Faculty Scholarship

In his essay, Religious Liberty as Liberty, Douglas Laycock cautioned against what he would later dub “the Puritan mistake,” which is the mistake, as he put it, of looking at whether religion is a good (or bad) thing rather than seeing religious liberty as “first and foremost a guarantee of liberty.” We should not, Laycock warned, let our understanding of the religion clauses be driven by what we think, substantively, about the value of religion. It should be driven, instead, by an interest in protecting the freedom of religion, and not religion per se.

Although Andy Koppelman positions himself in …