TITLE

THE PORNOGRAPHIC SECONDARY EFFECTS DOCTRINE

AUTHOR(S)
Fee, John
PUB. DATE
February 2009
SOURCE
Alabama Law Review;2009, Vol. 60 Issue 2, p291
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The secondary effects doctrine has made a muddle of First Amendment law. The doctrine formally holds that a speech regulation will be treated as content-neutral if its purpose is to control the secondary effects of speech, even if it facially discriminates according to speech content. It pretends to be a general First Amendment doctrine, but in practice it is all about regulating pornographic expression. This Article aims to re-evaluate the secondary effects doctrine in a way that is mare transparent. Appreciating the functional basis of the secondary effects doctrine is useful for understanding the doctrine's limitations, as well as for analyzing new types of regulation that may arguably fall within its scope. It also provides important lessons for general First Amendment theory, including how cost-benefit analysis affects the constitutional rules regarding content discrimination and how the purpose of a regulation affects the level of scrutiny that courts apply.
ACCESSION #
38216851

 

Related Articles

  • WHAT COMES OFF, COMES BACK TO BURN: REVENGE PORNOGRAPHY AS THE HOT NEW FLAME AND HOW IT APPLIES TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND PRIVACY LAW. GENN, BENJAMIN A. // American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law;2014, Vol. 23 Issue 1, p163 

    The article discusses the legal aspects of revenge pornography (RP) which involves the unauthorized distribution on the Internet of intimate photographs and videos of nude individuals who are posing or are engaged in various sexual activities, focusing on how RP applies to the First Amendment to...

  • Texas Appeals Court Rejects Lawrence-Based Challenge to Obscenity Statute.  // Lesbian -- Gay Law Notes;Mar2007, p47 

    The article reports that a Texas Court of Appeals in Fort Worth, Texas, has rejected a challenge to the state's obscenity law. The case concerns a challenge that Valeria Joyce Dave has made to a state case against her for the charges of "promoting obscenity" through the sale of tape recordings...

  • The First Amendment and the Second Commandment. Adler, Amy // New York Law School Law Review;2012/2013, Vol. 57 Issue 1, p41 

    The article presents information on the establishment of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the U.S. for the protection of the freedom of speech in the country with respect to the role of the Amendment in the contemporary obscenity prosecutions. The issue of the child pornography law...

  • Government Speech. Curran Jr, J. Joseph // Supreme Court Debates;Feb2009, Vol. 12 Issue 2, p7 

    An excerpt from a report by Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran Jr. on October 2, 2001 regarding the provision of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibiting Congress of making law abridging the freedom of speech is presented.

  • GOVERNMENT SPEECH.  // Supreme Court Debates;May2015, Vol. 18 Issue 5, p6 

    An excerpt from the report "Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the First Amendment" is presented.

  • First Amendment/free speech is in the crosshairs. Kolodziej, Elaine // Wilson County News;4/9/2014, p10A 

    The author reflects on the First Amendment to the Constitution of the U.S. which protects the freedom of speech of all Americans in the country.

  • First Amendment provides the muscle.  // Washington Jewish Week;11/19/2015, Vol. 51 Issue 47, p18 

    The author reflects on the U.S. First Amendment and its protection of free-speech rights which is applicable to journalists and demonstrators.

  • Clearing the Calendar.  // Time;7/8/1974, Vol. 104 Issue 2, p63 

    The article discusses the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court on cases related to the First Amendment right to freedom of expression in a bid to clear the court calendar by July 8, 1974, when the court will preside on the Watergate trials. In Jenkins v. Georgia, the court overturned the...

  • Content-Based Copyright Denial. SNOW, NED // Indiana Law Journal;Fall2015, Vol. 90 Issue 4, p1473 

    No principle of First Amendment law is more firmly established than the principle that government may not restrict speech based on its content. It would seem to follow, then, that Congress may not withhold copyright protection for disfavored categories of content, such as violent video games or...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics