Mississippi College School of Law
Not a member yet
1198 research outputs found
Sort by
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (17) Prior Restraints; The First amendment abhors a prior restraint
No full textThe First Amendment abhors a Prior Restraint. This presentation explains what is a prior restraint, why they are disfavored, and exceptions to the general rule. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (7) Defamation as Unprotected Speech, with Professor Kupenda
No full textThis presentation explains another unprotected category of speech, DEFAMATION. Remember, generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS government meets the most exacting level of scrutiny. However, government may regulate the Content of Pure Speech if the speech is in an UNPROTECTED category (which government generally may regulate with a low-level rational basis). The first category of unprotected speech discussed on earlier presentations was Speech that Advocates Illegal Action. This presentation will discuss “Defamation.” The presentation will discuss the major case where a police commissioner sued the NYTimes and several ministers who published a paid editorial in the NYTimes encouraging others to support the movement for racial equality. An Alabama police commissioner (whose name had not been called out) sued them for defamation because of minor inaccuracies in the ad and injuries to his reputation. This is one of the beginning cases where the Court addresses the result when state laws on defamation confront free speech. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (27) Current 1st Amend. Conflicts-Students’ Position Statements 2021
No full textA Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (26) Current 1st Amend. Conflicts-Students’ Position Statements 2021
No full textWhile the First amendment is short, there are many Court cases interpreting the amendment and many current debates. After taking an extended take home exam on all of the course material, my remote law students: selected a current First Amendment conflict they had a strong position about; researched the topic; and, wrote their own Student Position Statements where they applied the First Amendment to current conflicts we are now addressing as a nation in 2021. They are also making five minute presentations about their positions and responding to questions from classmates who may disagree with their positions. We cover from 5 to 7 position statements per day. For each class, I summarize the presentations in a video presentation (but I do not identify the students to protect their privacy). In our fourth day of presentations, the students\u27 position presentations were about: whether social media sites may suppress information; whether social media sites may ban speakers; whether a ban by social media sites is permissible if they are privately owned; whether social media requires regulation because of misinformation; and, whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act should be modified or repealed. Applying case law to argue their own positions AND considering the positions in opposition to their own is a further path to learning for my students. Remember, learning is a path to enlightenment and enlightenment to freedom, and freedom to justice or, at least, a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (10) Fighting Words as Unprotected Speech? with Prof. Kupenda
No full textThis presentation explains another unprotected category of speech, FIGHTING WORDS. Remember, generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS government meets the most exacting level of scrutiny or IF the speech is in an UNPROTECTED category (which government generally may regulate with a low-level rational basis). The categories of unprotected speech discussed on earlier presentations are: Speech that Advocates Illegal Action, Defamation, and Obscenity. This presentation will discuss “Fighting Words.” The presentation will discuss the major case where the test was established and other cases applying the test. The presentation also includes a brief review of unprotected categories, by considering a well known case about a man protesting the mandatory draft by wearing a jacket in a courtroom with the jacket containing a four letter vulgarity directed at the draft. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice
A Taste of Justice: 1st Amend. (2) Overview Unprotected Categories, Professor Angela Mae Kupenda
No full textThis video continues the introduction to the speech clauses of the First Amendment. The purpose of this presentation is to review the few basic rules to use as guides in applying the First Amendment. Then this presentation elaborates more on the third rule: Generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS...and there are several unless-es. In other words: Generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS government meets the most exacting level of scrutiny. Also, Generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS government can show that it was not a content regulation but a content neutral reasonable time, place, and manner regulation (which gives government more leeway). Also, Generally, government may not regulate the Content of Pure Speech UNLESS the speech is in an UNPROTECTED category which government generally may regulate with a low level rational basis. This presentation begins the discussion of UNPROTECTED categories of speech. The first category that is introduced is Speech that Advocates Illegal Action. This YouTube Channel is designed to provide my students supplemental instruction, as I teach them remotely. I want them to take a soak in the law and not a quick shower. This Channel is also designed to provide learning to the broader community. Learning can lead to enlightenment, and enlightenment to justice...or, at least, to a taste of justice