First Amendment Commons^™

Balancing Religious Liberties And Antidiscrimination Interests In The Public Employment Context: The Impact Of Masterpiece Cakeshop And American Legion, Brenda Bauges

Articles

No abstract provided.

"Inciting A Riot": Silent Sentinels, Group Protests, And Prisoners' Petition And Associational Rights, Nicole B. Godfrey

Seattle University Law Review

This Article argues for increased legal protections for prisoners who choose to engage in group protest to shed light on the conditions of their incarceration. A companion piece to a similar article that focused on prisoner free speech rights, this Article uses the acts of protest utilized by the Silent Sentinels to examine why prisoners’ rights to petition and association should be strengthened. By strengthening these rights, the Article argues that we will advance the values enshrined by the First Amendment’s Petition Clause while simultaneously advancing the rights of the incarcerated millions with little to no political power.

The Article …

Black Women And Girls And The Twenty-Sixth Amendment: Constitutional Connections, Activist Intersections, And The First Wave Youth Suffrage Movement, Mae C. Quinn

Seattle University Law Review

On this 100th anniversary of the Nineteenth Amendment—and on the cusp of the fiftieth anniversary of the Twenty-sixth Amendment—this article seeks to expand the voting rights canon. It complicates our understanding of voting rights history in the United States, adding layers to the history of federal constitutional enfranchisement and encouraging a more intersectional telling of our suffrage story in the days ahead.

Thus, this work not only seeks to acknowledge the Twenty-sixth Amendment as important constitutional content, as was the goal of the article I wrote with my law student colleagues for a conference held at the University of Akron …

Raising The Stakes: The Battle Between The First Amendment And Athlete's Publicity Rights In The Wake Of Murphy V. Ncaa, Alexis Nicole Lilly

American University Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Official, Figures, And Controversies In Minnesota Defamation Law, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

In Minnesota, the plaintiff in a common law defamation claim is entitled to recover presumed damages in libel and slander per se cases. Those rules change when the First Amendment is injected into defamation cases when the plaintiff is a public official or figure or is a private person involved in a public controversy. A plaintiff who is a public official or figure must prove not only the elements of the common law defamation claim, but also that the defamatory communication was a false statement of fact and prove by clear and convincing evidence that it was made with actual …

Platforms And The Fall Of The Fourth Estate: Looking Beyond The First Amendment To Protect Watchdog Journalism, Erin C. Carroll

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Dangerous Inheritance: A Child’S Digital Identity, Kate Hamming

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment begins with one family’s story of its experience with social media that many others can relate to in today’s ever-growing world of technology and the Internet. Technology has made it possible for a person’s online presence to grow exponentially through continuous sharing by other Internet users. This ability to communicate and share information amongst family, friends, and strangers all over the world, while beneficial in some regard, comes with its privacy downfalls. The risks to privacy are elevated when children’s information is being revealed, which often stems from a child’s own parents conduct online. Parents all over the …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Pre-Game Strategy For Long-Term Win: Using Trademark Registration And Right Of Publicity To Protect Esports Gamers, John Bat

Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology

The soaring popularity of esports across the globe has turned ultra-talented gamers into a blend of athlete and entertainer. The youthful esports ecosystem is exploding in growth, and the world is taking notice. But are the gamers who are eyeing professional play taking basic legal steps to develop and shield their brands, as well as bolster their collective negotiating leverage with teams, leagues, and miscellaneous entities? This note explores what features of an up-and-coming esports gamer might be worth protecting through a trademark and/or personality-rights schema, which in turn, could assist competitive gamers who are interested in developing their careers …

Holmes's Understanding Of His Clear-And-Present-Danger Test: Why Exactly Did He Require Imminence?, Vincent A. Blasi

Faculty Scholarship

For all the suggestiveness and staying power of his market-in-ideas metaphor, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s most significant influence on First Amendment law has turned out to be his notion that only imminent harm can justify punishment for expressions of opinion. This emphasis on the time dimension in the calculus of harm is now entrenched in modern doctrine. It is easy to imagine how First Amendment law might have developed differently had Holmes’s peculiar focus on imminence not been a factor in shaping how the freedom of speech has come to be understood in the United States.

The Past, Present, And Future Of Christian Adr, Ronald J. Colombo

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

Many religious traditions recommend (if not require) that their adherents bring some if not all of their disputes with co-adherents before a religious tribunal for resolution. The Christian religious tradition is no exception. That said, the dramatic history of the Church in the West, from that of a persecuted Jewish sect, to the official state religion of Imperial Rome, to an international authority competing with that of local monarchs, to its modern status of merely tolerated, has yielded a variety of evolving perspectives on the question of intra-faith dispute resolution within Christianity. This article examines that question and the historical …

The Decade Of Democracy's Demise, James Sample

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconsidering Thornton V. Caldor, Christopher C. Lund

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Dissent, Disagreement And Doctrinal Disarray: Free Expression And The Roberts Court In 2020, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

Using the United States Supreme Court’s 2019 rulings in Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, Nieves v. Bartlett, and Iancu v. Brunetti as analytical springboards, this Article explores multiple fractures among the Justices affecting the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press. All three cases involved dissents, with two cases each spawning five opinions. The clefts compound problems witnessed in 2018 with a pair of five-to-four decisions in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra and Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Partisan divides, the Article argues, are only one problem with First Amendment …

Rescinding Admission Offers In Higher Education: The Clash Between Free Speech And Institutional Academic Freedom When Prospective Students' Racist Posts Are Exposed, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article examines the tension between a prospective college student's First Amendment freedom of speech and a public university's unenumerated, inchoate right of institutional academic freedom. The friction between these interests was cast in high relief in 2020 when several schools confronted dual issues: (1) whether to rescind offers of admission to individuals who later were discovered to have engaged in offensive speech, and (2) whether revoking admission offers because of odious, hateful messages would violate the constitutional right of free expression. The Article argues that the right of institutional academic freedom-albeit maddeningly amorphous-encompasses a public institution's ability to choose …

Troll Storms And Tort Liability For Speech Urging Action By Others: A First Amendment Analysis And An Initial Step Toward A Federal Rule, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Commentary examines when, consistent with First Amendment principles of free expression, speakers can be held tortiously responsible for the actions of others with whom they have no contractual or employer-employee relationship. It argues that recent lawsuits against Daily Stormer publisher Andrew Anglin for sparking “troll storms” provide a timely analytical springboard into the issue of vicarious tort liability. Furthermore, such liability is particularly problematic when a speaker’s message urging action does not fall into an unprotected category of expression, such as incitement or true threats, and thus, were it not for tort law, would be fully protected. In examining …

Escaping Doctrinal Lockboxes In First Amendment Jurisprudence: Workarounds For Strict Scrutiny For Low-Value Speech In The Face Of Stevens And Reed, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court’s 2010 opinion in the crush-video case of United States v. Stevens made it extremely difficult to declare new varieties of low-value speech unprotected by the First Amendment. Five years later, the Court’s sign-ordinance ruling in Reed v. Town of Gilbert made it exceedingly tough for facially content-based regulations imposed on presumptively protected speech to be analyzed by any standard of judicial review less rigorous than the demanding strict scrutiny test. This Article examines how some courts today, despite being hemmed in by the strictures of both Stevens and Reed, are creatively unearthing novel ways to …

Testing The First Amendment Validity Of Laws Banning Sexual Orientation Change Efforts On Minors: What Level Of Scrutiny Applies After Becerra And Does A Proportionality Approach Provide A Solution?, Clay Calvert

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article examines the standard of scrutiny courts should apply when testing the validity of laws banning speech-based sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) against First Amendment challenges. Justice Clarence Thomas’s 2018 opinion for a five-justice conservative majority of the United States Supreme Court in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra casts considerable doubt on whether a level of inquiry less stringent than strict scrutiny applies. The article analyzes how lower courts after Becerra that have reviewed anti-SOCE laws disagree on the issue. And yet, as the Article explains, the Supreme Court refuses to clarify the muddle. First, …

Section 230 Immunity: How The Trump Era Has Exposed The Current Conflict Between The First Amendment And The Good Samaritan Clause In The Modern Public Square, Brandon Salter, Dhillon Ramkhelawn

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Law—Where Does It Fit? Solving The School Board Prayer Puzzle, Austin Reed

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.