Search

As the most influential theory in modern First Amendment law turns 100, this study integrates in a unified format centric to marketplace of ideas theory an assessment of developments with the potential to reconstruct broad media marketplaces into an array of cocoons, silos and bubbles of fabricated reality. That assessment provides the basis to argue that the most fundamental threat to marketplace-of-ideas theory lies in whether an effective framework can be developed for responding to particular uses of socially networked algorithms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In its most recent major commercial-speech case, Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court implied that commercial speech could thenceforth be considered nothing more than a protected viewpoint - rather than a component of contractual offerings between seller and buyer. The opinion has been called "incoherent" and "a Pandora's Box of First Amendment challenges." This study finds the efforts of lower courts to address a rapidly growing body of Sorrell-grounded claims have only begun to bring the nature of the ruling's impact on commercial-speech doctrine into focus. While it is not yet possible to reconcile the array of approaches and emphases asserted by various lower courts, the stark disagreement between two panels of appellate judges in the Ninth Circuit may represent an opportunity for the Supreme Court to provide clarification. Despite the ongoing debate among lower courts, a number of laws have been struck down that, but for Sorrell, would have remained on the books today. As this article documents, Sorrell's reach has already extended the doctrine breathtakingly far beyond the more limited understanding of what not so long ago comprised the outer boundaries of commercial speech. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most important concepts of modern commercial speech related to advertising, characterized as the "Powellian balance," resulted in a compromise between those who thought commercial expression should receive little or no First Amendment protection and those who argued that it receive the same expansive protection accorded to political expression. The private papers of Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. reveal the remarkable degree to which he maintained a deep commitment to balancing competing interests in shaping the commercial speech doctrine. The central argument of this monograph is that Powell's "middle way" can be employed to best promote today's vital and complex societal interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article documents the late seventies behind-the-scenes battle led by Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr., that forged a five-justice majority for a narrow Supreme Court holding in First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti to bring corporate political media spending within the protections of the First Amendment. It shows that justices on the Court then recognized the holding as a considerably greater alteration of established law than another five-justice majority would maintain in 2010—when it expanded the influence of corporate money on democratic processes and the marketplace of ideas far beyond that seventies precedent. Justices William H. Rehnquist and Byron R. White remained so dissatisfied with the result in Bellotti that each authored harsh dissents declaring the majority holding to be completely at odds with settled law, and both remained on the Court long enough to have the opportunity to help form majorities in a series of subsequent cases that served to substantially narrow its holding. Nevertheless, Bellotti established a firm enough footing in the case law to allow the majority at the Court in 2010 to extend its reach far beyond what was established in 1978. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the application of the principles of Adam Smith as an ethical basis for the regulation of corporate speech. Details of the works of Smith; Protection of corporate free speech in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; Discussion of the debate over corporate speech.