First Amendment Commons^™

Shining A Light On Democracy's Dark Lagoon, Helen Norton

Publications

Written for a symposium examining the Fourth Circuit’s jurisprudential tradition, this short essay explores the Fourth Circuit’s approach to the emerging government speech doctrine, under which the government’s own speech is exempt from free speech clause scrutiny. In developing this doctrine, the Supreme Court has been too quick to defer to public entities’ assertion that contested speech is their own; indeed, it has yet to deny the government’s claim to expression in the face of a competing private claim – at significant cost to the public’s ability to hold government politically accountable for its expressive choices. The Fourth Circuit, in …

Summum, The Vocality Of Public Places, And The Public Forum, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Territoriality And The First Amendment: Free Speech At - And Beyond - Our Borders, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

A Preliminary First Amendment Analysis Of Legislation Treating News Aggregation As Copyright Infringement, Alfred C. Yen

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The newspaper industry has recently experienced economic difficulty. Profits have declined because fewer people read printed versions of newspapers, preferring instead to get their news through so-called "news aggregators" who compile newspaper headlines and provide links to stories posted on newspaper websites. This harms newspaper revenue because news aggregators collect advertising revenue that newspapers used to enjoy.

Some have responded to this problem by advocating the use of copyright to give newspapers the ability to control the use of their stories and headlines by news aggregators. This proposal is controversial, for news aggregators often do not commit copyright infringement. Accordingly, …

The Alchemy Of Dissent, Jamal Greene

Faculty Scholarship

On July 10, 2010, the Orange/Sullivan County NY 912 Tea Party organized a "Freedom from Tyranny" rally in the sleepy exurb of Middletown, New York. Via the group's online Meetup page, anyone who was "sick of the madness in Washington" and prepared to "[d]efend our freedom from Tyranny" was asked to gather on the grass next to the local Perkins restaurant and Super 8 motel for the afternoon rally. Protesters were encouraged to bring their lawn chairs for the picnic and fireworks to follow.

There was a time when I would have found an afternoon picnic a surprising response to …

Educating The United States Supreme Court At Summers' School: A Lesson On The "Special Character Of The Animal", Rafael Gely, Ramona L. Paetzold, Leonard Bierman

Faculty Publications

In this article, we explore the implications that Professor Summers' insights regarding public employment have for the Garcetti and Davenport decisions. In particular, we focus on the extent to which the political nature of public employment affects public employees' rights to freedom of speech as well as matters regarding the representational functions of public employee unions.

"Cover My Pills": Contraceptive Equity And Religious Liberty In Catholic Charities V. Dinallo, Ayelet S. Lebovicz

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note  examines the tension between the New York Womens Health and Wellness Act's (WHWA) goal of promoting women's health through contraceptive access and its burden on the First Amendment rights of religious employers. It argues that while the WHWA advances significant public health interests, its contraceptive mandate imposes substantial burdens on religious freedom and free speech, necessitating strict scrutiny. The analysis critiques the New York Court of Appeals' decision for failing to fully consider the plaintiffs' hybrid-rights claims under Supreme Court precedent, highlighting the need for lawmakers to balance competing interests while adhering to constitutional protections.

A Popular Approach To Popular Constitutionalism: The First Amendment, Civic Education, And Constitutional Change, Thomas G. Donnelly

Law Faculty Publications

Popular constitutionalists fear that our constitutional culture is becoming less popular. At the same time, these scholars often ignore key popular sources of constitutional meaning. Their accounts focus,  instead, on the elite conflicts that give rise to constitutional change, particularly the ongoing debates between elected officials, movement leaders, and the Supreme Court. Although these studies are essential to understanding the pathways for promoting non-Article V constitutional change, they are "popular" only in the sense that they focus on non-judicial actors and politically salient controversies. The constitutional life of the average citizen is generally ignored. If legal scholars are serious about …

Behavioral Decision Theory And Implications For The Supreme Court's Campaign Finance Jurisprudence, Molly J. Walker Wilson

Cardozo Law Review

America stands at a moment in history when advances in the understanding of human decision-making are increasing the strategic efficacy of political strategy. As campaign spending for the presidential race reaches hundreds of millions of dollars, the potential for harnessing the power of psychological tactics becomes considerable. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has characterized campaign money as "speech" and has required evidence of corruption or the appearance of corruption in order to uphold restrictions on campaign expenditures. Ultimately, the Court has rejected virtually all restrictions on campaign spending on the ground that expenditures, unlike contributions, do not contribute to corruption or …

Corporate Political Speech: Who Decides, Lucian A. Bebchuk, Robert J. Jackson Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court spoke clearly this Term on the issue of corporate political speech, concluding in Citizens United v. FEC' that the First Amendment protects corporations' freedom to spend corporate funds on indirect support of political candidates. 2 Constitutional law scholars will long debate the wisdom of that holding, as do the authors of the two other Comments in this issue.3 In contrast, this Comment accepts as given that corporations may not be limited from spending money on politics should they decide to speak. We focus instead on an important question left unanswered by Citizens United: who should have the …

Government Speech 2.0, Helen Norton, Danielle K. Citron

Faculty Scholarship

New expressive technologies continue to transform the ways in which members of the public speak to one another. Not surprisingly, emerging technologies have changed the ways in which government speaks as well. Despite substantial shifts in how the government and other parties actually communicate, however, the Supreme Court to date has developed its government speech doctrine – which recognizes “government speech” as a defense to First Amendment challenges by plaintiffs who claim that the government has impermissibly excluded their expression based on viewpoint – only in the context of disputes involving fairly traditional forms of expression. In none of these …

From The Classroom To The Courtroom: Intelligent Design And The Constitution, Jay D. Wexler

Faculty Scholarship

Although the Supreme Court of the United States has never developed a single clear test for determining what kinds of state action violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, schools that attempt to teach or introduce intelligent design as a purportedly scientific alternative to evolution likely fall afoul of the First Amendment's commands. Under the Court's most relevant precedent, Edwards v. Aguillard, teaching intelligent design violates the Establishment Clause because, among other things, there is an enormous disconnect between the purpose of teaching intelligent design and its effect. Moreover, public school teachers do not possess any First Amendment right …

Citizens United And The Corporate Form, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Articles

In Citizens United vs. FEC, the Supreme Court struck down a Federal statute banning direct corporate expenditures on political campaigns. The decision has been widely criticized and praised as a matter of First Amendment law. But it is also interesting as another step in the evolution of our legal views of the corporation. This Article argues that by viewing Citizens Unitedthrough the prism of theories about the corporate form, it is possible to see that the majority and the dissent departed from previous Supreme Court jurisprudence on the First Amendment rights of corporations. It is also possible to then predict …

Flawed Assumptions: A Corporate Law Analysis Of Free Speech And Corporate Personhood In Citizens United, Anne M. Tucker

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

School Choice And The Challenges That Remain: A Comment On Richard D. Komer's "School Choice And State Constitutions' Religion Clauses", Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

Richard Komer’s paper helpfully and carefully shows that, after the Supreme Court’s 2002 ruling in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, a formidable obstacle to choice-based educational reform has been removed, and also that other, no-less-formidable obstacles remain, in the form of anti-aid provisions contained in various states’ own constitutions. This brief, appreciative Comment notes, first, that uncertainties remain about the implementation and interpretation of Zelman, and even—considering the possibility of new appointments to the Court—the decision’s fate. Next, and moving beyond the Court’s First Amendment doctrine, this Comment suggests that the effort to implement choice-based educational reform is, and will remain, as …

Copyright And The First Amendment: Comrades, Combatants, Or Uneasy Allies?, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

The copyright regime and the First Amendment seek to promote the same goals. Both seek the creation and dissemination of more, better, and more diverse literary, pictorial, musical and other works. But, they use significantly different means to achieve those goals. The copyright laws afford to the creator of a work the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, transform, and perform that work for an extended period of time. The First Amendment, on the other hand, proclaims that Congress "shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech or of the press," thus at least nominally indicating that limitations on the reproduction …

The Puzzle Of Brandeis, Privacy, And Speech, Neil M. Richards

Scholarship@WashULaw

Most courts and scholarship assume that privacy and free speech are always in conflict, even though each of these traditions can be traced back to writings by Louis D. Brandeis – his 1890 Harvard Law Review article “The Right to Privacy” and his 1927 concurrence in Whitney v. California. How can modern notions of privacy and speech be so fundamentally opposed if Brandeis played a major role in crafting both? And how, if at all, did Brandeis recognize or address these tensions? These questions have been neglected by scholars of First Amendment law, privacy, and Brandeis. In this paper, I …

The Unsettling ‘Well-Settled’ Law Of Freedom Of Association, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

This article argues that the Supreme Court’s categories of expressive and intimate association first announced in its 1984 decision, Roberts v. United States Jaycees, are neither well-settled nor defensible. These indefensible categories matter deeply to groups that have sought to maintain an unpopular composition and message in the face of antidiscrimination laws. These groups have been denied associational protections. They have been forced to change their composition - and therefore their message. They no longer exist in the form they once held and desired to maintain.

The Roberts categories of intimate and expressive association are at least partly to blame. …

The Strange Origins Of The Constitutional Right Of Association, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

Although much has been written about the freedom of association and its ongoing importance to American constitutionalism, much recent scholarship mistakenly relies on a truncated history that begins with Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984), the case that divided constitutional association into intimate and expressive components. Roberts’s doctrinal framework has been rightly criticized. However, neither the right of association nor all of its doctrinal problems start there. The Supreme Court’s foray into the constitutional right of association began a generation earlier with NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson, 357 U.S. 449 (1958).

This article offers a new …