First Amendment · WikiFramers

Freedom of Speech · Module 2

Free Speech Methodology

The most load-bearing line in the field. Content-based regulation draws strict scrutiny; content-neutral time, place and manner rules draw intermediate. Almost every case you meet after today is an argument about which side of that line a statute falls on.

Assigned reading

Chemerinsky, Constitutional Law (7th ed. 2023) — 1064–99.

The casebook is the assigned text for this course. This page is the map: what the Module is doing, in what order, and what goes with it.

Topics

The content-based / content-neutral distinction. Strict scrutiny for content-based regulation; viewpoint discrimination. Intermediate scrutiny and time, place and manner regulation; a comparison of the intermediate scrutinies in free speech. Vagueness and overbreadth.

Reading list

0 of 5 readings published · the rest are in preparation and will appear here as they are edited

  1. Opinion Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley in preparation
  2. Opinion Ward v. Rock Against Racism in preparation
  3. Opinion Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc. in preparation
  4. Opinion Reed v. Town of Gilbert in preparation
  5. Opinion City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising in preparation

Classroom visuals

Slides for this module PDF

Discussion

A Federal Buffer Zone Around Houses of Worship on Canvas — sign in required

This module in Canvas

Modules · Quizzes · Discussion boards · Files and recordings

How to read this list

A case named without a marker is assigned as an opinion and is to be read in its entirety. Opinion (edited) means the Professor has cut it for length; the text on this site is the assigned text. Note means the case is not assigned as an opinion at all — its holding, its facts to the extent they matter, and its place in the doctrinal line are given in a note written for this course, and you are responsible for that note exactly as you are responsible for an assigned opinion. Most modules close with a Current case, a recent decision chosen because it shows the doctrine you have just read being applied at its live edge; current cases are assigned as opinions. You are responsible for all assigned required materials, including the notes, questions, problems and commentary that accompany the cases, whether or not we discuss them in class.