Constitutional Rights

Print
Article
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
Free Speech Overrides
Frederick Schauer
Frederick Schauer is David and Mary Harrison Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia.

This Essay was prepared for the University of Chicago Law School’s Conference on What’s the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment, held on October 24, 2019.

The notion of an “absolute” First Amendment has been around for generations. Talk of an absolute First Amendment, however, is just that—talk.

Print
Article
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
The First Amendment as a Procrustean Bed?: On How and Why Bright Line First Amendment Tests Can Stifle the Scope and Validity of Democratic Deliberation
Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr.
John S. Stone Chair, Professor of Law, and Director of Faculty Research, University of Alabama School of Law.

With my thanks and appreciation to the editors of the University of Chicago Legal Forum for inviting me to participate in the What’s the Harm?: The Future of the First Amendment symposium at the University of Chicago School of Law. I also wish to express my thanks to the other participants in the symposium for their helpful and constructive comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this Essay. The usual disclaimer applies: any and all errors or omissions are the author’s responsibility alone.

In Greek mythology, Procrustes was a notorious bandit who would abduct travelers and then offer them a rather macabre form of hospitality.

Print
Article
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
The Shifting Law of Sexual Speech: Rethinking Robert Mapplethorpe
Amy Adler
Emily Kempin Professor of Law, NYU School of Law.

I would like to thank the University of Chicago Legal Forum for hosting me at the 2019 Symposium: “What’s the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment” where I presented an earlier draft of this paper. I’m also grateful to the New Museum of Contemporary Art for hosting me to speak on the anniversary of the Mapplethorpe trial at its event “‘Robert Mapplethorpe: The Perfect Moment,’ Twenty-Five Years Later” and to Kevin Moore and Fotofocus for curating the event. I am grateful for the insights of the other speakers at the event: Johanna Burton, Keith Haring Director and Curator of Education and Public Engagement at the New Museum; Jennifer Blessing, Senior Curator of Photography, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York; Paul Martineau, Associate Curator, Department of Photographs, the J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles; and Britt Salvesen, Curator and Head of the Wallis Annenberg Photography Department and the Prints and Drawings Department, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Many thanks to Lillian Barany, Katherine Nemeth, and Jeffrey Waldron for superb research assistance and to Cynthia Adler as always for her comments.

Print
Article
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
Defending Speech Crimes
Judith Miller

Tremendous thanks go out to my extraordinarily patient editors at the University of Chicago Legal Forum and to the other participants in the autumn false speech symposium, my devoted and insightful research assistant Elisabeth Mayer, and also to William Baude, Genevieve Lakier, David Owens, Erica Zunkel, Andrew Mackie-Mason, and Max Samels.

This article focuses on two procedural mechanisms for strengthening the First Amendment within the criminal legal system: robust grand jury/indictment and unanimity requirements. These requirements help vindicate the First Amendment by testing the facts of a case against the constitutionalized elements of the offense.

Print
Comment
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
The Practice of Prayer at School Board Meetings: The Coercion Test as a Framework to Determine the Constitutionality of School Board Prayer
Claire Lee
B.A., Purdue University, 2018; J.D. Candidate, The University of Chicago Law School, 2021.

Many thanks to Professor Emily Buss for her thoughtful feedback throughout the Comment writing process. I would also like to thank Deklin Veenhuizen and the members of the 2019–2020 Board of The University of Chicago Legal Forum for their support and guidance.

Prayer in the public sphere has been part of American daily life since the founding. Historically, both legislative sessions and school days began with Bible readings or prayers to solemnize the day.

Print
Comment
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
"Segs and the City" and Cutting-Edge Aesthetic Experiences: Resolving the Circuit Split on Tour Guides' Licensing Requirements and the First Amendment
Marie J. Plecha
B.A. Dartmouth College; J.D. Candidate, The University of Chicago Law School.

Tourism represents an important contributor to state and local economies. Accordingly, some U.S. cities have sought to regulate operations of the industry, including the activities of official tour guides.

Print
Comment
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
When Speech Isn't Free: The Rising Costs of Hosting Controversial Speakers at Public Universities
Rebecca Roman
B.S. Florida State University; J.D. Candidate, The University of Chicago Law School, 2021.

Many thanks to Professor Baird and Professor Stone for their guidance, and to Zachary Spencer for all of his great ideas, including the topic of this Comment. I would also like to thank my dear friends on The University of Chicago Legal Forum for their contributions to this piece.

“Free” speech seems like a misnomer when looking at the price public universities have to pay to protect students’ First Amendment rights. Accommodating controversial speakers on campus requires universities to balance budget constraints with free speech.

Print
Article
What's the Harm? The Future of the First Amendment
Uncommon Law: The Past, Present and Future of Libel Law in a Time of "Fake News" and "Enemies of the American People"
Jane E. Kirtley
Silha Professor of Media Ethics and Law, and Director of the Silha Center for the Study of Me-dia Ethics and Law, Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication, and affiliated faculty member, Law School, University of Minnesota.

Parts of this essay were adapted from the author’s lecture, “Uncommon Law: The Past, Present and Future of Libel in America,” delivered at the 2019 Reynolds School of Journalism First Amendment Forum at the University of Nevada in Reno, on April 23, 2019, and from her article Getting to the Truth: Fake News, Libel Laws, and “Enemies of the American People” published in Vol. 43, No. 4 of Human Rights Magazine. The author would like to thank Silha Center Research Assistants Scott Memmel, Sarah Wiley, and Jonathan Anderson for their invaluable research assistance. Uncommon Law: The Past, Present and Future of Libel in America, U. of Nev., Reno, h‌tt‌p‌s‌:‌/‌/‌e‌v‌e‌n‌t‌s‌.‌u‌n‌r‌.‌e‌d‌u‌/‌e‌v‌e‌n‌t‌/‌u‌n‌c‌ommon_law_the_past_present_and_future_of_libel_in_america#.XN8jrMhKiUk [https://perma.cc/EQ6Z-SS6D].

After many years of comparative quiet, the United States is experiencing a growth in libel suits brought by both public officials and private figures.

Print
Comment
Law for the Next Pandemic
Protecting Mixed-Status Families: Equal Protection Analysis of the Dual Social Security Number Requirement
Nena Gallegos
B.S., American University, 2019; J.D. Candidate, The University of Chicago Law School, 2022.

Many thanks to Professor Aziz Huq for his invaluable guidance and thoughtful feedback. I would also like to thank the past and present editors of The University of Chicago Legal Forum for their insightful contributions.

This Comment analyzes the equal protection issues raised by the Dual SSN Requirement and argues that it violates the equal protection rights of citizen children and spouses.

Print
Comment
Law for the Next Pandemic
Comity, Coronavirus, and Interstate Travel Restrictions
Timothy Carey
B.A., American University, 2017; J.D. Candidate, The University of Chicago Law School, 2022.

Many thanks to the staff of The University of Chicago Legal Forum, and to Professor Alison LaCroix, for generous support throughout the Comment writing process.

That interstate travel within the United States is largely so uncontroversial reflects a simple fact: the right to travel “occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union.” Yet in the aftermath of the COVID-19 outbreak, multiple states have restricted interstate travel.