scholarly journals “Dignitizing” Free Speech in Israel: The Impact of the Constitutional Revolution on Free Speech Protection

2012 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 791-856
Author(s):  
Guy E. Carmi
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
The Past ◽  
Model Following ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Israeli Supreme Court ◽  
Free Speech Rights ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Prior Restraint

This article examines the changes in the approach to the analysis of free speech rights in Israel. It demonstrates the growing shift from the American liberty-based influence in the 1980s to a more dignity-based, and principally Canadian- and German-inspired, model following the adoption of the partial bill of rights in the 1990s. This is demonstrated both by a statistical analysis of the Israeli Supreme Court free speech rulings in the past thirty years and by a substantive analysis of recent rulings in the areas of prior restraint, pornography, and libel. The statistical findings demonstrate that while human dignity rarely played a role in free speech rulings in the past, it plays a significant role today. Another indication of the “dignitization process” lies in the reference to foreign rulings. Moreover, a substantive examination of the Israeli Supreme Court’s free speech rulings from the last decade reveals the dignitization process both in rhetoric and outcomes. This article offers a means of strengthening the protection that free speech receives in Israel by divorcing the constitutional protection of free speech from the concept of human dignity, and by focusing on the value of liberty. This can be achieved by the incorporation of the unenumerated right to free speech via the liberty clause within Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty.

scholarly journals Scholarship Suppression: Theoretical Perspectives and Emerging Trends

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Stevens ◽  
Lee Jussim ◽  
Nathan Honeycutt
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Real World ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Sociological Analysis ◽  
The Past ◽  
Academic Scholarship ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
Free Speech Rights

This paper explores the suppression of ideas within academic scholarship by academics, either by self-suppression or because of the efforts of other academics. Legal, moral, and social issues distinguishing freedom of speech, freedom of inquiry, and academic freedom are reviewed. How these freedoms and protections can come into tension is then explored by a sociological analysis of denunciation mobs who exercise their legal free speech rights to call for punishing scholars who express ideas they disapprove of and condemn. When successful, these efforts, which constitute legally protected speech, will suppress certain ideas. Real-world examples over the past five years of academics who have been sanctioned or terminated for scholarship targeted by a denunciation mob are then explored.

Too Much Free Speech?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall P. Bezanson
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Washington State ◽  
Full Measure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Citizens United ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
The Past ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions

This book takes up an essential and timely inquiry into the Constitutional limits of the Supreme Court's power to create, interpret, and enforce one of the essential rights of American citizens. Analyzing contemporary Supreme Court decisions from the past fifteen years, the book argues that judicial interpretations have fundamentally and drastically expanded the meaning and understanding of “speech.” The book focuses on judgments such as the much-discussed Citizens United case, which granted the full measure of constitutional protection to speech by corporations, and the Doe vs. Reed case in Washington state, which recognized the signing of petitions and voting in elections as acts of free speech. In each case study, the book questions whether the meaning of speech has been expanded too far and critically assesses the Supreme Court's methodology in reaching and explaining its expansive conclusions.

Learning the Value of Rights: Abortion Politics and the Liberalization of Evangelical Free Speech Advocacy

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew R. Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
General Public ◽  
Campaign Finance ◽  
Past Century ◽  
The Past ◽  
Abortion Politics ◽  
Free Speech Rights

AbstractFor the past century, the expansion of free speech rights has been the domain of liberals. Recently, however, conservatives have become advocates for expanded free speech rights. For Evangelicals Protestants, this advocacy would have been highly controversial only a generation ago, offending the base's ordered liberty sentiments. I suggest that abortion politics is a primary contributor to the evangelical free speech advocacy shift. Using a variety of data, I detail the evangelical shift toward expanded free speech by exploring the topics of radical protest, campaign finance, and obscenity. While rank-and-file evangelicals are less supportive of free speech than the general-public, elites have routinely used abortion politics to frame the shift toward individual free speech rights. Elites have diverged from their constituents to support a higher-priority issue (abortion), and the constituents have been supportive. Abortion politics has come to dominate evangelical advocacy decisions and has cultivated an evangelical rights culture.

The Impact of the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty on the Law of Criminal Procedure and Evidence

1999 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 678-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliahu Harnon
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Social Background ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Law Of Evidence ◽  
The Impact

In March 1992, Israel's Parliament, the Knesset, enacted Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. Some believe that this Basic Law has created a constitutional revolution in Israel, while others feel this view to be exaggerated. In any event, there is general agreement that the Basic Law, with its 13 brief sections, has effected many significant changes in numerous areas of law.It is well known that criminal procedure and some parts of the law of evidence are particularly sensitive to constitutional changes. To what extent is this also true in Israel as a consequence of the Basic Law and interpretations given to it?More particularly, what precisely does the Basic Law say, and what has the Supreme Court inferred from the principles of human dignity and liberty beyond the express provisions of the Basic Law? What influence does the Basic Law exert on new legislation and indeed on legislation preceding the enactment of the Basic Law itself? May one expect that the Supreme Court will adopt the idea that the Basic Law embodies an exclusionary rule of evidence obtained in breach of a constitutional right? These, and other relevant questions, will be discussed below. First, however, we shall refer briefly to the legal and social background of the Basic Law.

A Decade Later and Still on Target: Revisiting the 2006 Israeli Targeted Killing Decision

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamar Meshel
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
State Terror ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
The Past ◽  
Israeli Supreme Court ◽  
The Impact

The increasing use by States of extraterritorial targeted killing as a counter-terrorism tool in recent years has given rise to controversial questions concerning its legality under international law. This article first explores the international legal regimes purporting to govern State-sponsored targeted killing and evaluates their ability to effectively regulate it. It then focuses on the use of targeted killing by States against members of non-State terror groups in an international armed conflict. In this regard, the article revisits the 2006 landmark decision of the Israeli Supreme Court in the Targeted Killing case and evaluates its influence and legacy over the past decade. It argues that this decision remains relevant and instructive since it exposes some of the lingering weaknesses of international law in governing the use of targeted killing as a counter-terrorism tool, while at the same time demonstrating how such weaknesses may be overcome within the existing international legal framework. The impact of the decision in this regard is clearly evident in the evolution of Israel’s targeted killing practice over the past decade.

Religious Activities in Public Schools

1999 ◽  
Vol 83 (610) ◽  
pp. 8-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph D. Mawdsley
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Religious Activities ◽  
The Past ◽  
Religious Issues ◽  
Teachers And Students ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Free Speech Rights

Religious activities in public schools have generated considerable litigation in the past few years. Not only are courts wrestling with the definition of religious free speech rights of teachers and students, but also with whether rights between these two categories can be different. Any differences between teachers and students notwithstanding, one can predict that any effort by public schools to treat teachers or students differently where religious issues are at stake could result in litigation.

Does Pornography Silence Women?

Pornography ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 51-87
Author(s):  
Mari Mikkola
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Speech Act Theory ◽  
The Past ◽  
Gut Feelings ◽  
Free Speech Rights

One of MacKinnon’s central claims is that pornography is not only words. Rather, pornographic speech subordinates and silences women. Using Austin’s speech act theory, Langton and Hornsby argue that pornographic speech has the power to silence women, thus depriving women of free speech rights. This silencing claim has attracted much philosophical interest over the past couple of decades. The chapter considers how we should understand the silencing claim by carefully dissecting the relevant literature. It further assesses the philosophical and practical tenability of the claim. The main philosophical lessons to arise from this chapter are as follows. First, even though some aspects of the silencing claim have pretheoretical plausibility, it remains to be established that pornographic speech is responsible for women’s silencing. Second, the silencing claim is often discussed by appealing to intuitive gut-feelings about specific cases. But (the chapter argues) this is not methodologically conducive to settling the matter.

scholarly journals Scholarship Suppression: Theoretical Perspectives and Emerging Trends

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Stevens ◽  
Lee Jussim ◽  
Nathan Honeycutt
Keyword(s):  
Academic Freedom ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Real World ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The Past ◽  
Academic Scholarship ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Emerging Trends ◽  
Free Speech Rights

This paper explores the suppression of ideas within academic scholarship by academics, either by self-suppression or because of the efforts of other academics. Legal, moral, and social issues distinguishing freedom of speech, freedom of inquiry, and academic freedom are reviewed. How these freedoms and protections can come into tension is then explored by an analysis of denunciation mobs who exercise their legal free speech rights to call for punishing scholars who express ideas they disapprove of and condemn. When successful, these efforts, which constitute legally protected speech, will suppress certain ideas. Real-world examples over the past five years of academics who have been sanctioned or terminated for scholarship targeted by a denunciation mob are then explored.

The Dual Role of Property Rights in Protecting Broadcast Speech

1998 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-208
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Hazlett
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Shopping Center ◽  
Constitutional Protection ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Free Speech Rights ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Do So

The connection between property rights and free-speech rights has most often surfaced in conflicts between the two. In his classic formulation of the problem, journalist A. J. Liebling mocked the First Amendment's free-press clause by noting that ownership of a printing press was required in order to actually enjoy the constitutional protection. In an important case decided in 1980, Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a group wishing to circulate political petitions at a shopping center had a constitutional right to do so. There the Court found that such governmentally enforced access to private property did “not amount to an unconstitutional infringement of [the shopping center owners'] property rights under the Taking Clause of the Fifth Amendment….”

The Garcetti Effect and the Erosion of Free Speech Rights of K–12 Public Education Employees: Trends and Implications

2017 ◽  
Vol 119 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Lewis M. Wasserman ◽  
John P. Connolly
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Voting Behavior ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Public Employees ◽  
Legal Precedent ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Free Speech Rights ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

Background/Context Pickering v. Board of Education, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968, is considered the high-water mark in the constitutional protection of public employee free speech. Two significant decisions issued by that Court since Pickering have limited public employees’ expressive rights: Connick v. Myers and Garcetti v. Ceballos. Purpose/Objective The principal research questions which were the focus of this study are: is the adverse effect on free speech presumed by legal analysts following Connick and Garcetti having real effects in terms of judicial voting behavior and, if so, how has this occurred? Research Design We set up legal precedent and the judge's ideology as predictors of judicial voting behavior. The legal precedent variable delineates three intervals, namely the Pickering era [1968–1983], the Connick era [1983–2006) and the Garcetti era [2006–2014]. Two different measures of ideology are considered: party affiliation and the judge's DW-NOMINATE score. The dependent variable is the judge's individual vote in each case. Votes are categorized as pro-employer or pro-employee. Data Collection and Analysis Because our interest is specific to K–12 settings we analyze 507 judicial votes drawn from the 169 U.S. Courts of Appeals employer-employee free speech cases brought by school employees between the issuance of Pickering in 1968 and the post-Garcetti period into 2014. Since our dependent variable is dichotomous the statistical estimates are obtained via logistic regression. Conclusions/Recommendations We find that employee-plaintiffs are prevailing at lower rates at the U.S. Courts of Appeals in free speech claims against public school districts following the Garcetti decision. Since Garcetti, Courts of Appeals judges—those appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents—have voted in an increasingly pro-employer direction. We contend this results from “doctrinal signaling,” here, the progressive curtailment in the Supreme Court of public employees’ free speech rights from Connick v. Myers in 1983 to Garcetti. We suggest this “signaling” is used by Courts of Appeals judges as an interpretive tool to give meaning to apparently ambiguous decisions such as Garcetti. Finally, the impact and implications of this negative trend for K–12 employees, as well as possible solutions, are considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document