scholarly journals Academic Freedom and the First Amendment in the Supreme Court of the United States: An Unhurried Historical Review

2020 ◽  
pp. 79-154
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Academic Freedom ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Supreme Court

Overview

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shira Tarrant
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
French Film ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Definition Of

What Is the Definition of Pornography? In 1964, the Supreme Court of the United States faced a controversy over whether Louis Malle’s French film The Lovers violated the First Amendment prohibition against obscene speech. In determining what exactly distinguishes pornography from obscenity,...

Overview

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shira Tarrant
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
French Film ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Definition Of

What Is the Definition of Pornography? In 1964, the Supreme Court of the United States faced a controversy over whether Louis Malle’s French film The Lovers violated the First Amendment prohibition against obscene speech. In determining what exactly distinguishes pornography from obscenity,...

scholarly journals Congress Shall Make No Law: The First Amendment, Unprotected Expression, and the U.S. Supreme Court

AmeriQuests ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Percy DeWitt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Associate ◽  
Daunting Task ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
The University

David M. O’Brien’s Congress Shall Make No Law: The First Amendment, Unprotected Expression, and the Supreme Court serves as a significant contribution to the field of First Amendment Law by offering an overview of crucial issues and, moreover, by emphasizing the outlook for the future of free speech. O’Brien’s credentials position him favorably for the task; he was a judicial fellow and research associate with the Supreme Court, he has written numerous articles and books on the Supreme Court, and he is currently the Leone Reaves and George W. Spicer Professor of Law at the University of Virginia. Considering the daunting task of compiling a succinct account and analysis of the history of free speech in the United States, Professor O’Brien does well to allow readers to better understand the complexities of free speech policy in the United States.

Antonin Scalia, William Brennan, and the Politics of Expression: A Study of Legal Violence and Repression

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 912-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Brisbin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Change ◽  
Disciplinary Actions ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Legal Violence ◽  
The Supreme Court

The study of legal politics often attends to the description and explanation of the instrumental politics of legal change or to the mobilization of rights by individual citizens as an act of empowerment beneficial to their individual liberty. Drawing far less attention from the discipline is the privileged construction of a discourse or set of attitudes about rights by the judiciary. I present a case study of the First Amendment opinions of two members of the Supreme Court of the United States to criticize the range of their attitudes about rights and to illustrate how their opinions help construct and legitimate the disciplinary actions that provide order in the modern liberal regime. To preserve order, the justices are shown to use the language of rights as an instrument for the facilitation of violence, repression, and subjection against some litigants, rather than as an instrument for the enhancement of expressive liberties.

scholarly journals Erecting a Virtual Schoolhouse Gate

2019 ◽  
pp. 73-89
Author(s):  
Maryam Ahranjani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Interest In Technology

The very first amendment to the United States Constitution protects the freedom of speech. While the Supreme Court held in 1969 that students “do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate,” since then the Court has limited students' freedom of speech, stopping short of considering the boundaries of off-campus, online speech. Lower court holdings vary, meaning that a student engaging in certain online speech may not be punished at all in one state but would face harsh criminal punishments in another. The lack of a uniform standard leads to dangerously inconsistent punishments and poses the ultimate threat to constitutional knowledge and citizenship exercise: chilling of speech. Recent interest in technology-related cases and the presence of a new justice may reverse the Court's prior unwillingness to address this issue. In the meantime, this chapter argues that school districts should erect a virtual schoolhouse gate by implementing a uniform standard.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document