The Supreme Court and the Meiklejohn Interpretation of the First Amendment

1965 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Brennan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The Supreme Court

A Note on the Law and Economics of Stolen Valor

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-119
Author(s):  
Dennis L. Weisman
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Wage Premium ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Jel Classifications

The issue of stolen valor concerns the act of trading on false claims of being awarded valorous military service medals. The Supreme Court overturned the 2005 Stolen Valor Act, largely on First Amendment grounds, ruling that even false speech deserves some protection. Misrepresentation that devalues the reputation of medals for valor may not violate the revised statute despite reducing the expected wage premium associated with being awarded the medal for valor and discouraging investment in military effort. Hence, the law and economics of stolen valor are in some conflict. JEL Classifications: D82, H1, K23

Overview

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shira Tarrant
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
French Film ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Definition Of

What Is the Definition of Pornography? In 1964, the Supreme Court of the United States faced a controversy over whether Louis Malle’s French film The Lovers violated the First Amendment prohibition against obscene speech. In determining what exactly distinguishes pornography from obscenity,...

Overview

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shira Tarrant
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The United States ◽  
French Film ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Definition Of

What Is the Definition of Pornography? In 1964, the Supreme Court of the United States faced a controversy over whether Louis Malle’s French film The Lovers violated the First Amendment prohibition against obscene speech. In determining what exactly distinguishes pornography from obscenity,...

The Supreme Court and the First Amendment

1987 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 195-196
Author(s):  
Nickieann Fleener
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
The Supreme Court

The Constitution and Campaign Finance Regulation after Buckley v. Valeo

1976 ◽  
Vol 425 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert J. Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Campaign Finance ◽  
Public Financing ◽  
Finance Reform ◽  
Campaign Finance Reform ◽  
Legislative Action ◽  
Disclosure Requirements ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Supreme Court

In a decision virtually unprecedented in scope, the Supreme Court, in Buckley v. Valeo, decided January 30, 1976, has ruled on a wide range of constitutional questions generated by federal campaign finance reform legis lation. In brief, limitations on contributions, reporting and disclosure requirements, and public financing of campaigns have been upheld as at least constitutional on their face, although the door is still open to attacks based on specific evidentiary showings of unconstitutional effects in particular situations. Limitations on expenditures—independently made on behalf of candidates, by candidates themselves out of their own funds, or in the course of the candidates' campaigns—have all been held unconstitutional, as infring ing upon rights under the First Amendment. The choices available for future legislative action, both federal and state, are henceforth likely to be limited in the light of the con straints to be found in the holdings and implications of this case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document