First Amendment Commons^™

Securitizing The University, Maryam Jamshidi

Publications

Since October 7, 2023, public and private actors have doubled down on efforts to securitize the American university. In large part, these initiatives aim to quash a vocal pro-Palestine movement that has become highly visible across U.S. campuses since October 7th. In targeting this group, these efforts have variously treated the university as an "object" of national security, namely, as a potential site of national security risk, while simultaneously encouraging or pressuring universities to "participate" in national security, namely, by actively and, in many cases, voluntarily furthering U.S. national security objectives. The university's status as object of and participant in …

Suspicion, Deference, And The First Amendment, Helen Norton

Publications

No abstract provided.

What Did Gitlow Do?, James Y. Stern

Faculty Publications

Gitlow is generally regarded as the first modern incorporation case, the genesis of both federal free speech curbs on state action and the larger project of making the same limitations that the federal Constitution imposes on the federal government applicable to the states. In both respects, moreover, it can also be seen as an important milestone in the larger twentieth century transformation of federal court practice and constitutional understanding centered on the assertion of individual rights. That linkage is no accident. For all the talk about federalism and state sovereignty in the U.S. Reports, the modern jurisprudence of constitutional rights …

Public Protest And Civil Unrest, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

Governments and officials must respond to protest-related civil unrest. How they do so is both an index of official respect for dissent and a measure of how committed governments are to democratic accountability. This Article examines official responses to civil unrest in connection with several recent high-profile demonstrations. In general, it concludes that governments and officials have relied on aggressive and increasingly draconian measures to quell protest-related civil unrest. Among other things, they have invoked emergency powers and used aggressive protest policing methods; dispatched federal agency personnel and threatened to deploy military forces to police demonstrations; enacted successive waves of …

New Threats To Campus Protest, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

This symposium Essay focuses on how universities responded, both initially and after the fact, to campus protests concerning the Hamas-Israel War. During those protests students and others erected encampments, held demonstrations, displayed signs, vandalized university property, and occupied buildings. Some protesters communicated anti-Semitic tropes and slogans. Although a few university leaders responded to the protests by negotiating with protest leaders, most relied on law enforcement and security to clear encampments and restore order. Since the initial protests, universities have adopted a spate of new policies that threaten campus protest. These measures include cancellation of already-permitted demonstrations, content-based speech restrictions, bans …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Voting Matters: Materiality Considerations And The Shareholder Vote, Renee M. Jones

Seattle University Law Review

For the shareholder franchise to have meaning, shareholders must have access to relevant information to inform their voting decisions. The securities laws’ disclosure requirements play an essential role in informing the shareholder vote.

This Essay focuses on the question of the materiality of information in the context of shareholder voting. It addresses the question of whether ESG-related information is material, positioning the materiality inquiry within the context of shareholders’ voting decisions. It explores the definition of materiality with a focus on the “reasonable investor” concept embedded within the definition. The Essay argues that the implicit expectations of many commentators that …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Understanding The Big Three’S Wavering Support Of Environmental And Social Shareholder Proposals, Jeff Schwartz, Jefferson Jensen

Seattle University Law Review

Because of their substantial equity portfolios, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street (the Big 3) are central players in corporate governance. It is, therefore, critical to understand how they vote. One puzzle is that their support for shareholder proposals on environmental and social matters appears to waiver. In 2020, for instance, BlackRock supported 11.1% of environmental proposals at S&P 500 firms. In 2021, it seemingly reversed course, supporting 55.2%. It then flipped again, supporting 32.1% in 2022. Such statistics suggest that the Big 3 are constantly changing their views on these topics. This Article seeks to better understand whether this is …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

The First Amendment, Global Corporate Responsibility Standards, & The Quest For Online "Speech Nirvana", Evelyn Aswad

Faculty Articles

With large and powerful social media companies operating as worldwide speech regulators, it is unsurprising that governments have attempted to not only regulate how these companies address platform speech but also pressure them to deliver preferred speech outcomes. In 2024, the Supreme Court decided two cases addressing both themes in the U.S. context. In Moody v. NetChoice, the Court explained how legislation regulating private platform curation of usergenerated content runs afoul of First Amendment protections. And, in Murthy v. Missouri, the Court appeared to erect significant hurdles to challenging alleged governmental coercion of such platforms. These cases have left many …

Insider Trading & Unconstitutionally Complelled Speech, Steven J. Cleveland

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court has recently weaponized the First Amendment to invalidate economic regulations. Consequently, the Court’s current analytical framework risks invalidating as unconstitutional certain speech compelled by Congress and the SEC to combat insider trading.

The government may compel speech to combat fraud, and many courts and commentators view insider trading as a fraud against the counterparty to the insider’s trade. Today, the government primarily resorts to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and its implementing regulations, including Rule 10b-5, to combat insider trading. Those regulations prohibit deceptive conduct and do not directly compel speech. Interestingly, in …

Discriminatory Censorship Laws, Jonathan Feingold, Joshua Weishart

Faculty Scholarship

The summer of 2020 ignited global protests for racial justice. Across the United States, millions marched with a modest plea: that America reckon with its racism. For K-12 schools, this moment pushed local communities and district leaders to create more inclusive classrooms and curricula. Yet before the summer had ended, America's antiracist turn provoked a backlash campaign that has proven far more impactful and enduring.

This campaign has featured the rise and spread of "discriminatory censorship laws"-a term we apply to government action designed to demean inclusionary values and to deny students access to critical knowledge, inquiry, and thinking. As …

Legislative Speech & Decorum, Sean J. Kealy

Faculty Scholarship

Decorum requires legislators to self-limit their free speech rights as citizens; things that may be said and done in the public square would violate legislative decorum rules. In 2023, two legislatures made headlines by using decorum rules to silence young legislators with minority views. In Tennessee, the House expelled two representatives after they walked into the House well and led protestors in the galleries in several chants demanding the House take up gun control legislation. In Montana, the House excluded a representative from the House Floor after she spoke against a bill to forbid minors access to gender affirming care. …

The Impossibility Of Religious Equality, Zalman Rothschild

Articles

The Supreme Court has recently adopted a new rule of religious equality: Laws unconstitutionally discriminate against religion when they deny religious exemptions but provide secular exemptions that undermine the law’s interests to the same degree as would a religious exemption. All the Justices and a cadre of scholars have agreed in principle with this approach to religious equality. This Essay argues that this new rule of religious equality is inherently unworkable, in part because it turns on treating that which is religious the same as its secular “comparators.” But religion is not comparable to anything neither in terms of its …

Gerard V. Bradley And The American Law Of Church And State, Richard W. Garnett

Journal Articles

This paper provides an overview and appreciation of Prof. Gerard V. Bradley’s scholarly contributions to the American constitutional law of church and state. The Supreme Court of the United States has, in recent years, handed down a number of closely watched and much-remarked-on rulings in cases involving the First Amendment’s Religion Clause and various religion-related statutes. The Court has moved the law of religious freedom and church–state relations toward coherence and clarity, and better aligned it with American history, tradition, and practice, and with an appropriate understanding of judges’ capacities and of the judicial role in a democracy. It appears …

Incitement, Enthusiasm, And The Dangers Of Negligent Protest, John D. Inazu

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Article explores the murky line between protected speech and assembly on the one hand, and harmful incitement on the other. On the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Oliver Wendell Holmes’s dissent in Gitlow v. New York, it explores Holmes’s famous dictum that “every idea is an incitement” as a conceptual starting point. By analyzing the relational and temporal dynamics between speaker and listener, the Article highlights how meaning and effect are often shaped by the listener’s agency and other circumstances beyond the control of the speaker. Two contemporary cases illustrate these dynamics. The first is the Fifth Circuit …

Viability As Abortion-Rights Orthodoxy, Susan Frelich Appleton

Scholarship@WashULaw

Borrowing a quotation from Justice Jackson’s influential opinion in West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, Professors Linda McClain and James Fleming have named their ambitious and illuminating new book “What Shall Be Orthodox” in Polarized Times. As Justice Jackson wrote in applying the First Amendment to protect school children with familial objections to a required flag salute: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act …

“Murder The Media”: Press Freedom, Violence, And The Public Sphere, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

The first goal of this chapter is to argue that the press as an institution is entitled to special solicitude under the First Amendment, not only because it is textually specified in the Constitution or because it serves important roles such as checking public and private power, but because it can contribute to the marketplace of ideas in ways that a healthy democracy needs. In other words, the press as an institution can provide an important link between the First Amendment’s epistemic and democratic values. The chapter’s second goal is to provide a rough and preliminary sketch of the relationship …

Listening On Campus: Academic Freedom And Its Audiences, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Current debates about campus speech often conflate two related but importantly distinct values: free speech and academic freedom. Both are widely perceived to be in crisis, but they are not interchangeable, and slippage between the two makes it even harder to frame, let alone address, difficult questions about speech in university settings. Many of the most fundamental challenges—indeed, much of what makes campus speech unique in the first place—arise from the need to accommodate both values. In doing so, defenders of academic freedom must, as advocates of free speech have, more clearly articulate an account of listener interests. The basic …