First Amendment Studies最新文献

{"title":"On the evolution and definition of ‘First Amendment studies’: Do we all engage in First Amendment studies?","authors":"Kevin A. Johnson","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2020.1838842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2020.1838842","url":null,"abstract":"When I began my academic study of the First Amendment about 20 years ago, the topics seemed pretty straightforward. The journal was then named Free Speech Yearbook, and took on some of the most conventional First Amendment issues. The early essays of the journal were written by scholars like Franklyn Haiman and Robert O’Neill and included topics like reviewing the year’s legal rulings in the courts about free speech, the practice of free speech on college campuses, bibliographies of First Amendment research, and what I would consider to be core First Amendment issues like censorship in the broadcasting medium, political protests including controversies like flag burning, and the examination of specific jurists on First Amendment issues. Over time, we have seen the nature of First Amendment studies proliferate as more and more subject areas that were not traditionally associated with the First Amendment have become First Amendment issues. This has also meant that scholars who may have never thought about themselves as First Amendment scholars are now finding themselves studying the First Amendment. For example, scholars that are interested in the study of agriculture may have never envisioned themselves becoming First Amendment scholars in cases about food libel. Gun rights scholars may not have envisioned themselves being First Amendment scholars in the study of cases involving the freedom to print and share 3D blueprints of guns. Technology experts may never have envisioned themselves making arguments about the extent to which First Amendment rights apply to artificial intelligence (like Amazon’s Alexa), or of the advancement of deep fakes. Scientists may not have envisioned themselves studying the First Amendment freedom to experiment with human cloning (i.e., the experiment as the expression of the idea of cloning). The list goes on and on. Scholars in these different areas are increasingly finding themselves bumping into First Amendment considerations. I think it is conceivable that, if we are not already, all of us will study the First Amendment in at least some small way at some point in our academic careers. Therefore, it has become increasingly important for the First Amendment Studies journal to serve as a place to centrally converse about the nature and scope of First Amendment issues in our evolving landscape. As Editor, I find it noteworthy to highlight two important features of the journal. Each of these features, I believe, will provide a clear way of addressing the evolution of First Amendment Studies in order to continue studying the core First Amendment areas found in the history of the journal, while also","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"149 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2020.1838842","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42851143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Contesting the place of protest in migrant caravans","authors":"Margaret Franz","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2020.1837648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2020.1837648","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Restrictions on assembly, all of which disproportionately target Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, demonstrate that the freedom to assemble depends on state-defined temporal, behavioral, and spatial boundaries of political practice. This essay analyzes how the migrant caravans organized by Pueblo Sin Fronteras (PSF) push against the state-derived boundaries on assembly. Specifically, it focuses on two tactics deployed by the caravans: (1) using the term caravan and caravana to describe border crossing, and (2) media practices that turned undocumented border crossing into border refusal. These tactics contested the nation-state sovereignty required to mark its jurisdiction, and thus, to decide on the correct place and form of politics. In the end, the essay argues that the caravan expanded what it means to freely assemble by turning undocumented migration into protest. Communication scholars should pay attention to this expansion because it illuminates alternate ways of being political that push against the legacy of nation-state sovereignty and colonization.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"181 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2020.1837648","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46399926","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Locating freedom of speech in an era of global white nationalism","authors":"A. Vats, M. Dutta","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2020.1838843","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2020.1838843","url":null,"abstract":"The chief spokespersons for this more refined sentiment against persons and voices that are new and unfamiliar to the campus and intellectual discourse are not the purveyors of gutter hate speech. They are polite and polished colleagues. The code words of this backlash are words like merit, rigor, standards, qualifications, and excellence. Increasingly we hear those who are resisting change appropriating the language of freedom struggles. Words like intolerant, silencing, McCarthyism, censors, and orthodoxy are used to portray women and people of color as oppressors and to pretend the powerful have become powerless.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"156 - 180"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2020.1838843","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43405899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Hindu nationalism and media violence in news discourses in India","authors":"Ashwini Falnikar","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2020.1838846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2020.1838846","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The mainstream media and communication discourses in India in the present times engender ‘media violence’ embedded in the dominant productions of ‘Hinduism’ together with aspirations for neoliberal development. The media violence engenders indigenous forms of racism and colonialism. This article attempts to examine the nature of these productions through critical theories of postcoloniality and decolonial approaches put into conversation with theories of journalism. Through the examination of the instances of selective silencing of journalistic voices, and erasures embedded within the journalistic practices, this article argues for critical theories of press freedom. The productions of racial superiority and internal colonialism in India only begin to make sense when read together with the interplays of religion, class, caste, and global reach of the privileged sections of Indian society, namely the civil society. Against the backdrop of the historical role of the press in India in freedom struggle against colonial rule, the history of press censorship after independence, the civil society voices that are amplified in the neoliberal restructuring of news media, and the Dalit movements that expose the Brahminical dominance in the imaginary of the ‘Indian culture’, the meanings of race and coloniality in India unfold.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"250 - 260"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2020.1838846","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44611438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Using think-alouds to understand how students balance free speech and inclusion","authors":"J. Bernstein, Cameron W. Armstrong","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2021.1884113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2021.1884113","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We explore student attitudes toward freedom of speech on campus using a think-aloud method, in which students are exposed to source material on a subject and “think aloud” as they work through the controversies. We gain an in-depth picture of how students understand and make judgments about who should and should not be allowed to speak on campus. Utilizing the think-aloud method to examine various cases of invited speakers on campus, we learn that students have difficult times differentiating legal and political reasons for preventing certain campus speakers. We also find that students tend to be more restrictive than a civil libertarian might like, albeit in (usually) internally consistent and sympathetic ways. We conclude by suggesting interventions that could help students better understand the way First Amendment rights are typically adjudicated and balanced against other lofty goals.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"55 1","pages":"22 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2021.1884113","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46031873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Circumventing the “true threat” and “viewpoint” protection tests to deal with persistent campus hate speech","authors":"C. Smith","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2020.1742759","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2020.1742759","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay suggests using harassment law as a mechanism for remedying defects in “true threat” and “viewpoint protection” language which places an undue burden of proof on those trying to quell hate speech on campuses. The essay reviews noted failures and their causes in “true threat” and “viewpoint protection” rulings. Currently, the First Amendment of the Constitution protects freedom of expression unless it presents “a clear and present danger,” is treasonous, obscene, libelous or slanderous. The initial “clear and present danger” standard laid out by Justice Holmes in the Schenck decision has been refined in several cases to create an even heavier burden of proof. Currently, based particularly on the Brandenburg v. Ohio and Virginia v. Black rulings, to be prosecutable, speech must be a “true threat,” which means person-specific, imminent, and possible. However, the Supreme Court has also protected hate speech by defining it as “viewpoint” in such case as Indiana v. Hess, Snyder v. Phelps, and Matal v. Tam. This essay concludes by exploring ways to circumvent the “true threat” and “viewpoint” standards by relying on harassment rulings and extending these precedents from the workplace to campus learning environments.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"109 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2020.1742759","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41961690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"is (not) a whistleblower: Ideographs, whistleblower protections, and restrictions of speech","authors":"Joshua Guitar","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2020.1742761","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2020.1742761","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Edward Snowden’s revelations ignited public discourse on whistleblowing and whistleblower protection legislation. Given the polemics over whistleblower distinctions throughout mediated exchanges between US officials and the press, this manuscript constitutes a synchronic ideographic analysis of pertinent, recognized ideographs as they were operationalized in relation to whistleblowing within the Snowden discourse. While news media and the public agreed that Snowden operated as a whistleblower, the US government adamantly denied this classification. Instead, US officials manufactured a media trial, and in three distinct phases, purged whistleblowing from the public forum, rhetorically criminalized Snowden as a threat to national , and utilized whistleblowing as a means to propagate the war on and defend covert surveillance. These processes afforded US officials the ability to funnel whistleblowers through private channels, effectively neutralizing the public power of whistleblowers. It is argued that removing whistleblowers from the public forum, while packaged as a protective measure for whistleblowers, operates as a defensive measure for state officials and authoritarianism writ large as it disarms a democratic populace of a foundational tool of free speech and dissent.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":"1 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2020.1742761","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46992533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Wedding cakes, equality, and rhetorics of religious freedom","authors":"Isaac West","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2019.1604246","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2019.1604246","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Wedding cakes are a site of vigorous debate about the meaning and scope of religious freedom. Unfortunately, when we privilege religious freedom as a frame for understanding these controversies we do so at the expense of a fuller commitment to equality. In an analysis of three conservative news sources as well as three sites of discourse, small business, religious freedom, and wedding cakes, this essay explores how and why particular assertions of religious freedom inform the sense that religious freedom should be favored over the full and fair application of state and federal equality laws.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"1 - 21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2019.1604246","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45336538","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reimagining the First Amendment: The Assembly Clause as a substantive right","authors":"Kevin McGravey","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2019.1601580","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2019.1601580","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The right to protest is central to democratic participation. This essay suggests that recent attempts to use the right to assemble as a doctrinal hook to better protect protest are correct but incomplete. Such attempts rightly suggest that the Court’s current approach through free speech inadequately protects protest directed at public officials. But this essay argues that such accounts and the Court’s jurisprudence also inadequately protect citizens’ privacy in public spaces. By looking at current cases, history and theory it proposes an alternative account of assembly that better protects participation and the equality necessary to make participation effective.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"67 - 90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2019.1601580","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42370835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Sweet baby Jesus, the band who must not be named, and friends U can’t trust: Disparaging, immoral and scandalous trademarks in the United States and the European Union","authors":"J. Dee","doi":"10.1080/21689725.2019.1601578","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21689725.2019.1601578","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article will compare the ways in which the European Union’s Office of Intellectual Property (EUIPO) and the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) have interpreted and applied their respective trademark laws, sometimes reaching opposite conclusions. Whereas EUIPO may not register trademarks considered to be “contrary to public policy and accepted principles of morality,” the US Supreme Court has struck down as unconstitutional a Lanham Act provision that had prohibited trademarks that were “disparaging,” and the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has struck down a Lanham Act provision that had prohibited trademarks that were “immoral” or scandalous.” After analyzing the legal arguments in trademark litigation in both Europe and the United States, this article concludes that the US Supreme Court should affirm the Federal Circuit’s decision in In re Brunetti because it is more efficient to “allow the marketplace to decide” rather than place the onus of keeping up with changes in cultural values on PTO examiners. This article assumes that the European Union will continue in its efforts to prevent registration of trademarks containing hate speech or racial slurs.","PeriodicalId":37756,"journal":{"name":"First Amendment Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"127 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21689725.2019.1601578","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47101409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}