Introducing The Emerging Threats Essays—A Serial Of Papers Most Novel (Or Newish) Challenges To The Freedoms Of Oral Communication Together With The Press



Jameel Jaffer in addition to David Pozen

The First Amendment’s gratis spoken language in addition to gratis press clauses, in addition to the values they stand upwardly for, accept been the champaign of report of intense disceptation inward recent years.  Events inward Charlottesville accept reinvigorated erstwhile debates most the proper answer to intend speech.  President Trump routinely vilifies the tidings media in addition to constitutional libel law.  Critics on the correct decry what they depict every bit a growing civilisation of close-mindedness on academy campuses.  Critics on the left decry a “Lochnerian” plough inward judicial doctrine, every bit the courts accept come upwardly to rely on the First Amendment to boundary rule of economical activity.  On the Internet, novel threats to political discourse—from “fake news” to increasingly subtle forms of governmental in addition to nongovernmental censorship made possible past times digital technologies—appear to hold upwardly mounting.

Against the background of these formidable challenges, nosotros are excited to denote that the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University volition committee in addition to expose a serial of essays that contend amongst newly arising or intensifying structural threats to the organisation of gratis expression.  These threats may hold upwardly caused past times changes inward the forms in addition to applications of technology, inward the way in addition to economic science of communication, inward the norms in addition to practices of politics, or inward legal doctrine itself.  The Emerging Threats papers explore ways to address these threats in addition to thereby save features of republic essential to salubrious opened upwardly societies.

We launch this serial today amongst the publication of a provocative seek past times Tim Wu, professor at Columbia Law School in addition to author of The Attention Merchants.  In “Is the First Amendment Obsolete?” Wu observes that to a greater extent than or less of the forces that undermine contemporary political discourse—such every bit “troll armies,” “flooding,” in addition to propaganda robots that aim to distort or drown out disfavored speech—may hold upwardly beyond the attain of the First Amendment every bit traditionally interpreted.  To secure the expressive surroundings against these threats, Wu explores a arrive at of possible responses, including novel uses of “accomplice liability” in addition to “captive audience” doctrines nether the First Amendment in addition to novel laws that would broaden criminal liability for online intimidation of members of the press.  We asked 2 leading legal scholars to reverberate on Wu’s arguments.  Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago identifies historical parallels to the threats Wu spotlights in addition to urges caution, spell Rebecca Tushnet of Harvard Law School considers possible extensions of Wu’s ideas inward areas such every bit compelled spoken language in addition to populace education.

In hereafter Emerging Threats essays, authors including Matthew Connelly, Justin Driver, Lina Khan, Kate Klonick, Frederick Schauer, Amanda Shanor, in addition to Olivier Sylvain volition show the legal in addition to policy implications of faux news, hostile audiences, privately owned online platforms, regime secret-keeping, economical concentration inward the media in addition to related sectors, online bear that harms historically subordinated groups, in addition to other phenomena that are raising profound challenges for the organisation of gratis expression.  We don’t await to offering elementary or uncontroversial solutions to whatever of these challenges, only nosotros promise that the serial volition deepen for sure existing First Amendment debates in addition to spark to a greater extent than or less novel ones.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Emolument Inwards Blackstone's Commentaries

The discussion “emolument” occurs 16 times inwards William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England .  Here is a listing of chapters inwards which the term appears:   Book I (Of the Rights of Persons) 1.       Introduction (“Of the Study, Nature, as well as Extent of the Laws of England”) a.        Section IV (“Of the Countries Subject to the Laws of England”) 2.       Chapter VII (“Of the King’s Prerogative”) 3.       Chapter VIII (“Of the King’s Revenue”) 4.       Chapter XI (“Of the Clergy”) 5.       Chapter XVIII (“Of Corporations”) Book II (Of the Rights of Things) 6.       Chapter III, #1 (“Of Incorporeal Hereditaments”) 7.       Chapter III, #2 (“Of Incorporeal Hereditaments”) 8.       Chapter V (“Of the Ancient English linguistic communication Tenures”) 9.       Chapter XVIII  (“Of Title yesteryear Forfeiture”) 10.   Chapter XXI (“Of Alienation yesteryear Matter of Record”) 11.   Chapter XXXI (“Of Title yesteryear Bankruptcy”) 12
Read more

The Solicitor General's Baffling Brief Inwards Lucia V. Sec

In a serial of recent posts (most recent here ), I’ve been sharply critical of filings past times the Solicitor General inward the Hargan v. Garza abortion litigation, involving HHS’s efforts to deny minors inward their de facto custody the powerfulness to exercise their constitutional rights.   Last month, for example, I wrote that the Solicitor General’s nominal “Petition for Certiorari” in No. 17-654 “[i]n many respects . . . departs, sometimes dramatically, from the justly lauded, traditional standards as well as practices of [the Office of the Solicitor General].”   Unfortunately, it appears that the Hargan litigation is non a singular aberration.   Three weeks later on his petition inward Hargan , the Solicitor General filed another extraordinary brief inward No. 17-130, Lucia v. SEC , well-nigh a topic far removed from (and less heated than) abortion rights—namely, whether the Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) who piece of work inward the Securities as well as Exchange C
Read more

Revisionist History--Season 3

I'm a fan of Malcolm Gladwell's podcast, together with the get-go episode of this flavour is virtually the punctuation of the Constitution. More specifically, the episode discusses a paper  by Michael Stokes Paulsen together with Vasan Kesavan, which argues that the Texas Legislature has the ability to subdivide the country into upward to 4 novel states because Congress gave its consent to that activity when Texas was admitted to the Union inwards 1845. (Talk virtually the potential for partisan gerrymandering!) There are several other fascinating points inwards the podcast. One is that Gladwell spends a lot of fourth dimension talking virtually the punctuation inwards the Constitution without considering the possibility that the rules of grammer were dissimilar inwards the eighteenth century. I don't know if they were inwards a meaningful way, but the supposition inwards the episode is that nosotros should empathise the run of commas, semicolons, etc. equally they are us
Read more