Managed speech : the Roberts court's First Amendment

This book comprehensively explores and critiques how the current U.S. Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts, has reshaped First Amendment law. It argues that this Court has consistently used First Amendment law to promote a limited view of freedom, while bolstering social and political stability. Abstract: This book comprehensively explores and critiques how the current U.S. Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts, has reshaped First Amendment law. It argues that this Court has consistently used First Amendment law to promote a limited view of freedom, while bolstering social and political stability This book comprehensively explores and critiques how the current U.S. Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts, has reshaped First Amendment free speech law. The book argues that the Roberts Court's First Amendment decisions consistently conform to a version of expressive freedom that the author calls managed speech, providing limited protection for expressive autonomy while bolstering social and political stability. The book critiques managed speech and advocates a contrasting vision of constitutional speech protection called dynamic diversity, which aims to broaden the range of ideas and participants in public discussion. The book examines every one of the more than forty decisions about expressive freedom that the Supreme Court handed down between Chief Justice Roberts' ascent in September 2005 and Justice Scalia's death in February 2016. These decisions comprise one of the most important, controversial parts of the Roberts Court's record and legacy. The author explores key recurring debates in First Amendment law across three categories of free speech problems: regulations of private speech; restrictions on speech that involves government institutional subjects, government property, or government funding, which the author calls government preserves; and regulations of speech in the electoral process. -- Oxford Scholarship Online. The marrow of tradition : categorical exclusions from First Amendment protection -- Fair and balanced : regulations of political dissent and commercial profit -- My house, my rules : strengthening government managers' control over institutional speech -- Speakers, cornered : weakening the public forum -- There's always a catch : speech-restrictive conditions on government funding -- Of parties and petitions : regulations of election procedures -- Letting money into elections : Citizens United and McCutcheon -- Keeping money out of elections : government leveling and labor speech -- Manged speech and beyond : confronting the Roberts court's First Amendment. Gregory P. Magarian. Includes bibliographical references and index. Our constitutional freedom to speak out against government and corporate power is always fragile, but today it faces unprecedented hazards. In Managed Speech: The Roberts Court's First Amendment, leading First Amendment scholar, Gregory Magarian, explores and critiques how the present U.S. Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, has reshaped and degraded the law of expressive freedom. This timely book shows how the Roberts Court's free speech decisions embody a version of expressive freedom that Professor Magarian calls "managed speech". Managed speech empowers stable, responsible institutions, both government and private, to manage public discussion; disfavors First Amendment claims from social and political outsiders; and, above all, promotes social and political stability. Professor Magarian examines all of the more than forty free speech decisions the Supreme Court handed down between Chief Justice Roberts' ascent in 2005 and Justice Antonin Scalia's death in 2016. Those decisions, taken together, aggressively advance stability at a steep cost to robust public debate. Professor Magarian proposes a theoretical alternative to managed speech, one that would aim to increase the range of ideas and voices in public discussion: "dynamic diversity." A First Amendment doctrine based on dynamic diversity would prioritize political dissent and the rights of journalists, allow for reasonable regulations of money in politics, and work to broaden opportunities for speakers to be heard. This book offers a fresh, critical perspective on the crucial question of what the First Amendment should mean and do.