Special Issue: New and forthcoming books, scholarly articles — FAN 351

1. Richard L. Hasen, “Donald Trump Should Remain Deplatformed from Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube Despite the High Bar That Platforms Should Apply to the Question of Deplatforming Political Figures,” SSRN (Oct. 7)
2. Tyler Valeska, “Abortion Speech Suppression,” SSRN (July 28)
3. Tyler Valeska, “First Amendment Limitations on Public Disclosure of Protest Surveillance,” Columbia Law Review Forum (2022)
4. Clay Calvert, “First Amendment Battles over-Anti-Deplatforming Statutes: Examining Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo’s Relevance for Today’s Online Social Media Platform Cases,” New York University Law Review (2022)
5. Jordan Wallace-Wolf, “Nobody’s Business: A Novel Theory of the Anonymous First Amendment,” Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly (2022)
6. John Fabian Witt, “Weaponized from the Beginning,” SSRN (Sept. 2)
7. Kristin A. Olbertson, “Speech, Law, & Power in the American Revolution,” Legal History Blog (July 6)
8. Eugene Volokh, “UNC Chapel Hill Student Gov’t President Cuts Off Funding & Contracting to Anyone Who ‘Advocates’ for Limits on Abortion,” The Volokh Conspiracy (July 28)
9. Elaine Margolin, “Moments of Grace: On Azar Nafisi’s ‘Read Dangerously: The Subversive Power of Literature in Troubled Times‘,” LA Review of Books (April 6)
10. Stuart Brotman, “Free Speech, Free Press, Play Ball!,” Inside Sources (March 31)
11. Note, “Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press v. FBI,” Harvard Law Review (2022)
12. George R. La Noue, “Time to Challenge Compelled Speech?,” Law & Liberty (March 29)
13. Sherry Co, “Masterpiece Cakeshop Redux and the Homophobia Exemption from Anti-Discrimination Law,” Verdict (March 9)
14. Adam Candeub, “Editorial Decision-Making and the First Amendment,” SSRN (Sept. 1)
15. Mary Ann Franks, “Reforming Section 230 and Platform Liability,” SSRN (Oct. 10)
16. Genevieve Lakier, “A Counter-History of First Amendment Neutrality,” Yale Law Forum (2022)

Recent conference

• “Election Speech and the First Amendment Symposium,” First Amendment Law Review (Jan. 21) (Participants: Mary-Rose Papandrea, Helen Norton, Martin Redishm Clay Calvert, Evan Ringel, William Marshall, Eric Muller, Richard Hasen, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Leslie Kendrick, David Ardia, Jasmine McNealy, Brenda Reddix-Smalls, Robert Yablon, & Neema Guliani)

Tribute to Tony Mauro

Terry Carter, “Pathbreaking Journalist, Remarkable Human Being, ‘Jeopardy’ Clue: ‘Who is Tony Mauro?’,” The Texas Lawbook (Oct. 3)

Lawyers prepare for U.S. Supreme Court arguments with research, more research and numerous moot court go-rounds. And they study the justices themselves, looking for clues to succeed. Which ones are more likely to interrupt their arguments and in what ways? Which ones have habits, histories or inclinations that might inform an effort to persuade them?

For decades, plenty of those nuggets have come from Tony Mauro, a journalist who became a clue himself on the TV show “Jeopardy” in April 2009. (A long-time reporter for USA Today and then the National Law Journal and the rest of ALM Media, Mauro is semi-retired and joined Texas Lawbook in 2020 as a regular contributor.)

The Jeopardy-ized answer (“phrased in the form of a question”): What is a court reporter? In reality, that is the barest minimum description for someone who has become a big name in legal affairs journalism without even trying to be. A lot of reporters have covered the court; and then there’s Mauro, the pathbreaker.

“Tony changed the nature of Supreme Court coverage, which traditionally has been focused on the public actions of the court,” says Adam Liptak, who began covering the court for The New York Times in 2008. “He broadened the lens to look at the culture of the court, the advocates, clerks, the justices in public appearances, their [clerk] hiring patterns and their commitment, or not, to transparency. I view him as an important and seminal figure in modern Supreme Court reporting.”

Mauro realized early on that almost any tidbit having to do with the Supreme Court — no matter how subtle — is worth a story.

“Appetite for information about the Supreme Court is so huge,” says Liptak, “there almost is no such thing as a small story. Tony has an excellent eye for minor or telling developments or historical incidents that illuminate contemporary practice.”

Upon meeting Mauro, Liptak told him, “I want to write stories like you do.”

FIRE’s cable TV free speech ad campaign (MSNBC & CNN)

• “FIRE launches new free speech ad campaign featuring Collin College professors,” FIRE (Oct. 10)

YouTube: Comedian Tracy Morgan on attacks on free speech

• “Tracy Morgan Supports Free Speech In Comedy,” The Kelly Clarkson Show (Sept. 14, 2022) (see 4:35 minutes into interview) (Morgan: “(“I think there’s an attack on free speech.”)

YouTube: Oral arguments in campaign-finance enforcement action

• Institute for Free Speech v. Fred Jarrett (arguments before Ninth Circuit panel: Oct. 7) (“An appeal from the district court’s summary judgment for defendants and dismissal for lack of standing of an action brought by the Institute for Free Speech, which wishes to represent tax-activist Tim Eyman pro bono in a state court appeal of a campaign-finance enforcement action.”).

More in the news

• Lizzie O’Leary, “A Supreme Court Case Could Decide the Fate of the Modern Internet,” Slate (Oct. 10)
• Jonathan Turley, “Buy, Elon, buy: Musk’s renewed interest in Twitter could be a win for free speech,” USA Today (Oct. 10)
• Anelise Powers, “New systemwide harassment policy puts all Minnesota State universities in the red,” FIRE (Oct. 7)
• Sarah K. Burris, “Marjorie Taylor Greene uses her First Amendment rights to claim the First Amendment is dead,” Raw Story (Oct. 9)
• Susanna Granieri, “NRA Free Speech Lawsuit Dismissed Against NY State Financial Regulator,” First Amendment Watch (Oct. 4)
• Francie Diep, “It’s Not Clear Whether Public-College Professors Have First Amendment Rights When They’re Teaching,” Chronicle of Higher Education (Sept. 26)

2022-2023 SCOTUS term: Free expression & related cases

Review granted 

• 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis

Pending petitions

• Moody v. NetChoice, LLC
• Counterman v. Colorado
• United States v. Hansen
• Klein v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries
• Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC

Qualified Immunity

• Novak v. City of Parma

Liability under Anti-Terrorism Act

• Twitter v. Taamneh

Section 230 Immunity

• Gonzalez v. Google (review granted)

Review Denied

• My Pillow v. U.S. Dominion (news story)
• Kowall v. Benson
• Tofsrud v. Spokane Police Department
• Swanson v. Griffin County

Last FAN

FAN 350: “Cert. petition: Facebook jokester, parody, free speech, and qualified immunity”

The post Special Issue: New and forthcoming books, scholarly articles — FAN 351 appeared first on FIRE.