A provocative new article by Yale Law School’s Robert Post tackles a perceived “growing pessimism about the future of free speech in the United States”—in the words of a recent New York Times editorial, the fear that Americans are losing hold of their right “to speak their minds and voice their opinions in public without fear of being shamed or shunned.” Professor Post challenges the Times’ call for greater toleration and its belief that more speech can help heal our politics as embracing “a cruel delusion of the free speech principle” since “more speech of the w
Abrams Institute Conversations: The Novel Theory That Could Radically Reshape Federal Elections, Carter Philips, Partner, Sidley
The Supreme Court this term in Moore v. Harper will take up a momentous federalism issue: whether the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures unreviewable authority to set rules for federal elections that may conflict with the constitutions of their own states. Critics have attacked the “independent state legislature” theory advanced in Moore as extreme and dangerous, but four conservative Justices have previously issued opinions indicating they might be prepared to accept it.
The adoption by Florida and Texas of statutes limiting social media companies from engaging in content modification policies of their choice has recently led the federal courts of appeal in two circuits to address the topic. When one of the cases reached the Supreme Court recently, it divided by a five-four vote about whether a ruling below in favor of the social media entities should be stayed.
Journal of Free Speech Law: Revisiting Defamation, Incitement, and Hate Speech in the era of Social Media
Jacob Mchangama & Natalie Alkiviadou, “South Africa the Model? A Comparative Analysis of Hate Speech Jurisprudence of South Africa and the European Court of Human Rights”
Please use this link to make your reservation now, and join us on March 18
The Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic and the Abrams Institute for Freedom of Expression annually bring together transparency advocates of all stripes to identify current impediments to government openness and to develop strategies for addressing them. Law school clinicians from around the country, together with investigative journalists, academics, practicing lawyers, and law students, explore some of the most urgent transparency issues in the areas of law enforcement, national security and surveillance, government data and personal privacy, and newsgathering rights.
The topic of freedom of speech on campus is hardly a new one but the desirability of addressing it in a serious and sophisticated manner may never have been greater than at this time. To do so, we are pleased to have two scholars of particular distinction in this area of law and social policy who will discuss the topic with Floyd Abrams.
The Pentagon Papers Case began exactly fifty years ago to the day from this luncheon exchange about its impact, then and now. The case resulted in one of the most significant press victories in our history, yet one that raised questions about its scope and application from the day it was decided. The unanswered questions have only multiplied as the Internet revolutionized how the news is disseminated.
As speech on the Internet increasingly dominates public discourse, the decision-making within Facebook, Google and the like about what to carry and what not is of ever-increasing import.