The criminalization consensus and the right to sext

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Adele Hasinoff
Keyword(s):  
Speech Act ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Moral Panic ◽  
Child Pornography ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Education Programs ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
American Civil Liberties Union

This chapter examines the consensus that teenagers should have no right to sext and argues for the decriminalization of consensual teen sexting. It begins with a discussion of two cases at the beginning of the moral panic about sexting in 2009: in the first, the American Civil Liberties Union supported three girls who were threatened with child pornography charges by an overzealous prosecutor; the second case is the development of Vermont's sexting legislation in 2009. The chapter then considers the main problems with the criminalization of consensual sexting: the uneven application of the law, punitive and unfair education programs, and the silencing of victims whose privacy has been violated. It also outlines arguments in favor of allowing teens to sext, contending that this could, among other things, confirm their right to freedom of expression. The chapter concludes by contending that it may be more practical to think about regulating consensual sexting as a sex act (rather than a speech act).

Sedition in Liberal Democracies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anushka Singh
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Political Speech ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Indian Experience ◽  
Judicial Discourse ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

Liberal democracies claim to give constitutional and legal protection of varying degrees to the right to free speech of which political speech and the right to dissent are extensions. Within the right to freedom of expression, however, some category of speeches do not enjoy protection as they are believed to be ‘injurious’ to society. One such unprotected form of political speech is sedition which is criminalized for the repercussions it may have on the authority of the government and the state. The cases registered in India in recent months under the law against sedition show that the law in its wide and diverse deployment was used against agitators in a community-based pro-reservation movement, a group of university students for their alleged ‘anti-national’ statements, anti-liquor activists, to name a few. Set against its contemporary use, this book has used sedition as a lens to probe the fate of political speech in liberal democracies. The work is done in a comparative framework keeping the Indian experience as its focus, bringing in inferences from England, USA, and Australia to intervene and contribute to the debates on the concept of sedition within liberal democracies at large. On the basis of an analytical enquiry into the judicial discourse around sedition, the text of the sedition laws, their political uses, their quotidian existence, and their entanglement with the counter-terror legislations, the book theorizes upon the life of the law within liberal democracies.

scholarly journals Guilty of using Google: Reconciling the right to a fair trial with the right to freedom of expression and addressing juror misconduct in the age of social media

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Emma Jane Smith
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Communications Technology ◽  
Independent Research ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

<p>It is widely accepted that the right to a fair trial is one of the most important guarantees contained within our legal system. That right is undermined when a jury member conducts his or her own research into a case. This type of juror misconduct constitutes contempt of court. In the light of the fact that the law of contempt is currently the subject of review in a number of jurisdictions, this paper considers how the law of contempt could be adapted to better manage the risk of jurors undertaking independent research. After a discussion of the current law and some problems with it, particularly those created by modern communications technology, this paper considers a number of possible reform options. It makes two broad recommendations. First, that the law should focus relatively more on preventing jurors undertaking their own research than on limiting publication. Second, that independent research by jurors should be the subject of statutory criminalisation, and a range of measures should be adopted to increase jurors’ understanding of the importance of not going outside the evidence before them and to minimize any incentives for jurors to conduct their own research.</p>

scholarly journals Academic Freedom and Its Protection in the Law of European States

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 254-345
Author(s):  
Klaus D. Beiter ◽  
Terence Karran ◽  
Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Academic Freedom ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Focusing on those countries that are members of the European Union, it may be noted that these countries are bound under international human rights agreements, such as the International Covenants on Civil and Political, and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights or the European Convention on Human Rights, to safeguard academic freedom under provisions providing for the right to freedom of expression, the right to education, and respect for ‘the freedom indispensable for scientific research.’ unesco’s Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel, a ‘soft-law’ document of 1997, concretises international human rights requirements to be complied with to make the protection of the right to academic freedom effective. Relying on a set of human rights indicators, the present article assesses the extent to which the constitutions, laws on higher education, and other relevant legislation of eu states implement the Recommendation’s criteria. The situation of academic freedom in practice will not be assessed here. The results for the various countries have been quantified and countries ranked in accordance with ‘their performance.’ The assessment demonstrates that, overall, the state of the protection of the right to academic freedom in the law of European states is one of ‘ill-health.’ Institutional autonomy is being misconstrued as exhausting the concept of academic freedom, self-governance in higher education institutions sacrificed for ‘executive-style’ management, and employment security abrogated to cater for ‘changing employment needs’ in higher education.

Epilogue

2020 ◽  
pp. 179-192
Author(s):  
Donald W. Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Jersey City ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
Congress Of Industrial Organizations ◽  
Industrial Organizations ◽  
Police Harassment ◽  
The Right ◽  
American Civil Liberties Union

This epilogue shows that Hague v. CIO had a legacy more complex than its reputation as a speech rights victory for workers and others over dictatorial city boss Frank Hague under the Bill of Rights. The American Civil Liberties Union and renamed Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) immediately split over the decision’s ramifications. Moreover, while the ruling enlarged constitutional protection for the right of public assembly to the benefit of Jehovah’s Witnesses, civil rights demonstrators, and others, it did little to enhance picketing and other “labor speech,” or to shield union organizers from police harassment. And while the decision freed the CIO to organize in Jersey City, it did not destroy Mayor Hague, who accommodated CIO unions and was ousted later due to city politics.

13. Intentional interferences with the person

2021 ◽  
pp. 327-356
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Civil Liberties ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
False Imprisonment

This chapter considers intentional interferences with the person, including the so-called trespass to the person torts, the tort in Wilkinson v Downton and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Trespass is an ancient set of wrongs which mainly deals with the direct, and usually intentional, invasion of a claimant’s interest in his person, his land or his goods. It is the right itself which is protected, and not just the freedom from resulting damage, and much of the law of trespass is the basis of civil liberties today. This chapter considers the torts of assault, battery and false imprisonment, together with various defences. The principal use today of these torts relates not so much to recovery of compensation but to the establishment of a right, or a recognition that the defendant acted unlawfully. The chapter then considers the tort in Wilkinson v Downton which provides a remedy in cases of indirect intentional infliction of distress and the statutory tort of harassment (Protection from Harassment Act 1997).

13. Intentional interferences with the person

2019 ◽  
pp. 319-345
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley
Keyword(s):  
Civil Liberties ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
False Imprisonment

This chapter considers intentional interferences with the person, including the so-called trespass to the person torts, the tort in Wilkinson v Downton and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Trespass is an ancient set of wrongs which mainly deals with the direct, and usually intentional, invasion of a claimant’s interest in his person, his land or his goods. It is the right itself which is protected, and not just the freedom from resulting damage, and much of the law of trespass is the basis of civil liberties today. This chapter considers the torts of assault, battery and false imprisonment, together with various defences. The principal use today of these torts relates not so much to recovery of compensation but to the establishment of a right, or a recognition that the defendant acted unlawfully. The chapter then considers the tort in Wilkinson v Downton which provides a remedy in cases of indirect intentional infliction of distress and the statutory tort of harassment (Protection from Harassment Act 1997).

Tibetans Wait for China's Next Move

Worldview ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Kesang Tseten
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right ◽  
American Civil Liberties Union ◽  
The U.S ◽  
International League

AbstractIt has been twenty years since the Tibetan uprising. Last March, Tibetans and their American supporters rallied outside the United Nations building to commemorate that uprising against Chinese troops occupying the Tibetan homeland.Roger Baldwin, founder of the American Civil Liberties Union and honorary president of the International League for Human Rights, was there calling for support of resolutions passed three times by the U.S. General Assembly, in 1959, 1961, and 1965. The U.S. called “for respect for the fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people and for their right to self-determination.” The rally, Baldwin said, was to protest the “subjection of six million people to foreign rule” and to uphold “the right to live in your own house.” The nonagenarian champion of civil liberties expressed some hope: “It may be that autonomy, semi-independence in Tibet, may be granted when China settles down into the modernization it seeks.”

scholarly journals Protest und Demokratisierung in Myanmar: Erste Erkenntnisse aus dem „Myanmar Protest Event Dataset“

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 295-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Buschmann
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Economic Transition ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Reforms ◽  
Authoritarian State ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Rights Standards

Abstract Myanmar has been perceived to be in a sociopolitical and economic transition since the semi-civilian government under President Thein Sein took office in 2011. Amongst other things, for a representative democracy to function, citizens have to have the freedom to express their opinions and deliberate them with fellow citizens. This requires the secure granting of fundamental civil liberties, as prescribed in the freedom of expression, association, and assembly. Hence, once in the process of democratization, a formerly authoritarian state has to make significant improvements in the granting and protection of these rights too. To empirically test whether Myanmar has made such improvements since 2011 is the goal of a greater research project I am working on. This research note introduces the project and summarizes first findings. By combining knowledge on legal reforms and protest data from the Myanmar Protest Event Dataset, it is suggested that, in Myanmar, the de jure exercisability and de facto exercise of fundamental civil liberties have significantly improved from 2011 to 2015. Informal methods of suppressing the right to protest, such as arbitrary violence, have increasingly descended while methods that are formally in accordance with the rule of law but still lack compliance with international human rights standards have ascended.

scholarly journals Digital Security Act and Investigative Journalism in Bangladesh: A Critical Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-236
Author(s):  
Md. Aliur Rahman ◽  
Harun-Or Rashid
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Investigative Journalism ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
Information And Communication ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
The Right ◽  
Harmful Effects

The Digital Security Act 2018 has created some barriers for citizens' accessing information and freedom of expression, particularly for the media professionals including journalists in Bangladesh. Thus, investigative journalism is now in a state of fear for distinction. In this context, the purpose of the study is to explore various effects of this Act, as well as to focus on different directions of protection while facing fears associated with the law. Showing the necessities for investigative journalism, this article also presented different fields of such an effective journalism. Methodologically, this article has followed the qualitative approach and collected information from both the primary and secondary sources. The findings from this study have shown that the fear of negative impacts form the Digital Security Act is dominant although the aim of the law, as described, is to provide security for information and communication. From the analysis of opinions of experts, it is easily predictable that some articles of the law have created dangerous threats on the way of investigative journalism, considering its applicable effects. Most of the experts expressed concerns about the negative impacts the law does have, as shown in the findings.  It is also reflected that these harmful effects would fall ultimately on the shoulder of the state creating such a bad situation where the government is feared to have lagged in terms of taking the right decisions at the right time.

scholarly journals Peffer v. Stephens

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 647-678
Author(s):  
Shane Landers
Keyword(s):  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Fourth Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Technological Advancement ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The People ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Constitutional Republic

The Fourth Amendment provides for the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Search warrants may only be issued upon a finding of probable cause. This core tenet of our constitutional republic becomes progressively flexible with every development in Fourth Amendment interpretation. In Peffer v. Stephens, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit delivered the latest blow to constitutional rights that restrict the State from engaging in unprincipled searches. In an issue of first impression, the Sixth Circuit held that a criminal defendant’s alleged use of a computer during the commission of a crime was adequate probable cause to justify a search of the defendant’s home and a seizure of the technological equipment inside. Such a shortsighted justification fails to consider technological innovation, economic policy, and historical civil liberties. Peffer v. Stephens is the latest proof of the parasitic relationship between the law and technological advancement. As technology evolves, the law struggles to keep pace and resultingly impedes economic development. With the exponential growth of technology in the 21st century, a visionary approach to search and seizure law is necessary to promote economic innovation and to refrain from further dismantling Fourth Amendment protections.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document