First Amendment Commons^™

The High Cost Of Free Speech: Anti-Solicitation Ordinances, Day Laborers And The Impact Of 'Backdoor' Local Immigration Regulations, Kristina M. Campbell

Journal Articles

This paper examines how local efforts to regulate the activities of immigrants, while not regulation of immigration per se, can have a substantial and detrimental effect on the civil rights of immigrants and Latinos. The paper discuss how day laborers - individuals, mostly Latino men, who seek short-term employment in public fora - are routinely targeted by state and local governments, federal immigration authorities, anti-immigrant activists, and the general public as a symbol of the employment of unauthorized aliens. Even though many day laborers are lawfully present, or have authorization to work in the United States, due to the high-profile …

First Amendment Protection Of Teachers' Instructional Speech: Extending Rust V. Sullivan To Ensure That Teachers Do Not Distort The Government Message, Emily White Kirsch

Cleveland State Law Review

The emergence of political activism in the 2008 presidential election extended throughout the country and even to where partisan politics have no place: the public school classroom. In 2004, the New York City Board of Education enacted a regulation that prohibited teachers from wearing any material supporting political candidates or organizations. During the 2008 election, teachers who wanted to wear partisan political buttons in the classroom while teaching claimed that the regulation violated their First Amendment rights. Although the Southern District of New York ultimately held that the teachers had no First Amendment claim, the court's decision, which involved sorting …

Abridging Constitutional Rights: Sexting Legislation In Ohio, Weronika Kowalczyk

Cleveland State Law Review

What happens when you combine technology, raging adolescent hormones, and rash decisions? As we have seen these past few years, one outcome is “sexting” the trend of teenagers transmitting sexually suggestive text messages or photographs through cell phones and similar communication devices. In 2009, the media was saturated with stories pertaining to sexting, from discussing the ramifications of engaging in it including cyber bullying, slashed reputations, and serious criminal charges to providing guidelines for what parents and educators could do to control or prevent it. Though sexting includes the transmission of messages as well as photographs, the majority of media …

Ill Telecommunications: How Internet Infrastructure Providers Lose First Amendment Protection, Nicholas Bramble

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently proposed an Internet nondiscrimination rule: "Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner." Among other requests, the FCC sought comment on whether the proposed nondiscrimination rule would "promote free speech, civic participation, and democratic engagement," and whether it would "impose any burdens on access providers' speech that would be cognizable for purposes of the First Amendment." The purpose of this Article is to suggest that a wide range of responses to these First Amendment questions, offered by telecommunications providers …

The History And Constitutionality Of Maryland’S Pregnancy Speech Regulations, Mark L. Rienzi

Scholarly Articles

On December 4, 2009, Baltimore, Maryland enacted the nation's first law regulating the speech of individuals and groups who want to talk to pregnant women about whether to have an abortion. Less than two months later, nearby Montgomery County, Maryland enacted the second. These regulations only apply to speakers who want to talk about one particular subject: pregnancy. As a practical matter, the regulations only apply to speakers who oppose abortion. Counselors who work for organizations willing to provide abortions are entirely exempt. Immediately after these laws passed, abortion providers and their allies across the country began plans to pursue …

Ceremonial Deism And The Reasonable Religious Outsider, Caroline Mala Corbin

Articles

State invocations of God are common in the United States; indeed, the national motto is "In God We Trust." Yet the Establishment Clause forbids the state from favoring some religions over others. Nonetheless, courts have found the national motto and other examples of what is termed ceremonial deism constitutional on the ground that the practices are longstanding, have de minimis and nonsectarian religious content, and achieve a secular goal. Therefore, they conclude, a reasonable person would not think that the state was endorsing religion.

But would all reasonable people reach this conclusion? This Article examines the "reasonable person" at the …

Comments: Keep It Clean: How Public Universities May Constitutionally Enforce Policies Limiting Student Speech At College Basketball Games, Jonathan Singer

University of Baltimore Law Review

No abstract provided.

In God We Trust: The Judicial Establishment Of American Civil Religion, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 869 (2010), James J. Knicely, John W. Whitehead

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unlawful Infringement Or Just Creative Expression? Why Dj Girl Talk May Inspire Congress To "Recast, Transform, Or Adapt" Copyright, 43 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1067 (2010), Katie Simpson-Jones

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Transformation Of Freedom Of Speech: Unsnarling The Twisted Roots Of Citizens United V. Fec, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 69 (2010), Steven J. André

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Prop 8 Decision And Courtroom Drama In The Youtube Age: Why Camera Use Should Be Permitted In Courtrooms During High Profile Civil Cases, Matthew E. Feinberg

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Government Identity Speech And Religion: Establishment Clause Limits After Summum, 19 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1 (2010), Mary Jean Dolan

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

This Article offers in-depth analysis of the opinions in Pleasant Grove v. Summum. Summum is a significant case because it expands "government speech" to cover broad, thematic government identity messages in the form of donated monuments, including the much-litigated Fraternal Order of Eagles-donated Ten Commandments. The Article explores the fine distinctions between the new "government speech doctrine"- a defense in Free Speech Clause cases that allows government to express its own viewpoint and to reject alternative views-and "government speech" analyzed under the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government from expressing a viewpoint on religion, and from favoring some religions over others. …

The State Secrets Privilege In The Post-9/11 Era, 30 Pace L. Rev. 778 (2010), Steven D. Schwinn

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Regulating Offensiveness: Snyder V. Phelps, Emotion, And The First Amendment, Christina E. Wells

Faculty Publications

In its upcoming term, the Court will decide in Snyder v. Phelps whether Albert Snyder can sue the Reverend Fred Phelps and other members of the Westboro Baptist Church for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress for protesting near his son’s funeral. Those arguing in favor of tort liability claim that the Phelps’ speech during a time of mourning and vulnerability is especially outrageous and injurious and that the First Amendment allows such regulation. Their arguments, however, effectively rely on the offensiveness of the Phelps’ message rather than on any external indicia of harm, such as noisy …

Speech, Truth, And Freedom: An Examination Of John Stuart Mill's And Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes's Free Speech Defenses, Irene M. Ten Cate

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Essay: Religious Displays And The Voluntary Approach To Church And State, Thomas Berg

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Panel Discussion

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Essay: Curing A Monumental Error: The Presumptive Unconstitutionality Of Ten Commandment Displays, Peter Irons

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antitrust Censorship Of Economic Protest, Hillary Greene

Faculty Articles and Papers

Antitrust law accepts the competitive marketplace, its operation, and its outcomes as an ideal. Society itself need not and does not. Although antitrust is not in the business of evaluating, for example, the “fairness” of prices, society can, and frequently does, properly concern itself with these issues. When dissatisfaction results, it may manifest itself in an expressive boycott: a form of social campaign wherein purchasers express their dissatisfaction by collectively refusing to buy. Antitrust should neither participate in nor censor such normative discourse. In this Article, I explain how antitrust law impedes this speech, argue why it should not, and …

Nobody's Fools: The Rational Audience As First Amendment Ideal, Lyrissa Barnett Lidsky

UF Law Faculty Publications

Assumptions about audiences shape the outcomes of First Amendment cases. Yet the Supreme Court rarely specifies what its assumptions about audiences are, much less attempts to justify them. Drawing on literary theory, this Article identifies and defends two critical assumptions that emerge from First Amendment cases involving so-called core speech. The first is that audiences are capable of rationally assessing the truth, quality, and credibility of core speech. The second is that more speech is generally preferable to less. These assumptions, which I refer to collectively as the rational audience model, lie at the heart of the marketplace of ideas …