Freedom Of Speech Rights Research Articles

Democracy at Risk: The Public Employee Freedom of Speech Crisis

The article argues that the Pickering/Connick/Garcetti line of cases defining the First Amendment freedom of speech rights of public employees provides them little protection when they engage in organizational dissent. The article explains that the U.S. Supreme Court has embraced a managerial approach to the freedom of speech rights of public employees because of its belief that organizational dissent may seriously undermine the efficiency and effectiveness of public organizations. Due to this fact, the article argues that public employees must develop a comprehensive understanding of First Amendment freedom of speech jurisprudence to maximize their protection from retaliation.

The $12,000 Tweet: A Collision at the Intersection of Social Media and Copyright Law

The use of social media may be contributing to violations of copyright law and can create legal challenges for school districts trying to balance ease of communication and First Amendment freedom of speech rights against compliance with federal regulations. In this case, a district is threatened with a lawsuit for copyright violation when one of the employees retweets a trademarked phrase. The case explores how school districts monitor copyright law, issues surrounding social media accounts for teachers and other employees such as coaches, the district’s liability for what is shared on those accounts, professional development, and possible board and district responses.

When Hate Comes to Campus: Campus Readiness for Conflict, Safety, and Student Voice

A state voter proposition concerning gun regulation motivated a local far-right political group to organize a pro-gun rally on campus. Overriding the safety and security concerns of faculty and students, freedom of speech rights required that the group be allowed to assemble on campus. The case explores interactions among administration, faculty, and students that illuminate campus tensions related to race, readiness for conflict, student safety, and student voice. Authors suggest exploring these tensions and issues through the lenses of organizational leadership theory and Critical Race Theory, providing readers the opportunity to better analyze similarly charged incidents in their contexts.

An Employment Stance on Taking a Knee

At the commencement of the 2016 NFL season, Colin Kaepernick, one of the quarterbacks for the San Francisco 49ers, and Megan Rapinoe, midfielder for the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team, among other professional athletes, began exercising their First Amendment freedom of speech by kneeling during the national anthem before their respective professional league games as a protest to promote awareness for social injustice and police brutality. The protests immediately sparked politicalcontroversy, and the persisting nationwide social injustice debate was brought into the conversation of a multibillion dollar industry: professional sports. However, the burning question that has yet to be addressed in the endless hoursof media coverage and political opinions is what actions the San Francisco 49ers, U.S. Women’s Soccer, and other sports and entertainment organizations legally may take against athletes and entertainer-employees who are exercising their First Amendment freedom of speech rights. The public outcry has focused on the rights of the individuals, but are they entitled to behave at will without repercussions in their employment? This article will explore the legal landscape concerning the First Amendment’s freedom of speech within the employment arena involving athletes, entertainers, and organizations, as well as anticipate social and legal consequences for all parties involved.

The Deconstitutionalization of Academic Freedom After Garcetti v. Ceballos?

The supreme court in Garcetti v. Ceballos ( 2006 ) held that public employees do not have constitutional rights to speak out on matters of public concern in the course of the performance of their official duties. The article examines the First Amendment freedom of speech rights of faculty employed at public universities and colleges before and after the Garcetti decision by examining lower federal court decisions. It argues that lower federal courts have applied Garcetti to the intramural speech, further limiting the freedom of speech rights of faculty members engaged in university governance activities. The article also argues that lower federal courts have not ruled on whether Garcetti applies to the classroom speech of college faculty.

Discourses of Technology and Liberation: State Aid to Net Activists in an Era of “Twitter Revolutions”

Although the use of social media for the purposes of protest organization and dissent in Iran, Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya was widely reported by bloggers, journalists, and academics, these reports were rarely rooted in detailed research. In fact, the terms “Twitter Revolution” and “Facebook Revolution” have now been called into question as overly techno-utopian, and as ignoring the use of social media by authoritarian regimes for the purposes of repression. Despite this lack of concrete evidence, representatives of the Swedish state were quick to declare social media as key tools in the battles over freedom of speech rights and democratic change. On January 21, 2011, the Swedish Minister for International Development Cooperation published an opinion piece in the Expressen newspaper, titled, “Net Activists Are the New Democracy Fighters.” The response of the Swedish administration—primarily how the administration made clear links between technological innovation and democratic/social change, and translated those links into concrete action in the form of aid—raises a number of questions regarding the ways in which a powerful stakeholder appears to assume a causal relation among technology use, the expansion of access to information, and democratic change. The purpose of this article is to examine how the technology discourse forwarded by the current Swedish government—in policy documents and public statements—reflects a liberation technology perspective on the relation between technology and sociopolitical change in developing countries, particularly in relation to possible foreign aid to net activists.

Mock Trial: A Window to Free Speech Rights and Abilities

This article provides some strategies to alleviate the current tensions between personal responsibility and freedom of speech rights in the public school classroom. The article advocates the necessity of making sure students understand the points and implications of the first amendment by providing a mock trial unit concerning free speech rights. This unit not only teaches the rules of civility in a courtroom, it also presents a free speech case based upon one that actually happened in a public school classroom. Direct involvement in this case provides a safe environment for students to grapple openly with free speech limits.

Developments in the Law: Garcetti v. Ceballos and the Workplace Freedom of Speech Rights of Public Employees

On May 30, 2006 the Supreme Court handed down a 5–4 decision in the case of Garcetti v. Ceballos, announcing that “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.” Previously, the Court had held in Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) that the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech generally prohibited public employers from firing or disciplining employees for speaking out on matters of “public concern.” The Pickering decision established a two‐part test that first required federal courts to determine whether the employee had spoken out on a matter of public concern and then whether the disruptive impact of the employee’s statement justified the disciplinary action. This article argues that the Garcetti decision may deter many public employees from disclosing governmental inefficiency and misconduct and presenting dissenting viewpoints on matters of clear public concern. Consequently, the decision may make it more difficult for the leadership of public agencies to uncover inefficiency and misconduct.

The Supreme Court and the Deconstitutionalization of the Freedom of Speech Rights of Public Employees

In Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006), the United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not prohibit a public employer from disciplining a public employee for the contents of an official memorandum made in the course of the performance of official duties, even if a federal court finds that the contents of the memorandum involved a matter of “public concern.” This article argues that the Garcetti decision modifies the Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) and Connick v. Myers (1983) two-part test by requiring federal courts to first determine whether or not the public official made a communication in the course of the performance of official duties. The article also argues that it remains to be seen whether the Garcetti decision will have a significant impact on the willingness of public employees to make use of official channels to raise legitimate concerns over actions taken or not taken by their organizations.

Advertising to children on TV: content, impact, and regulation

Concern is growing about the effectiveness of television advertising regulation in the light of technological developments in the media. The current rapid growth of TV platforms in terrestrial, sattelite, and cable formats will soon move into digital transmission. These all offer opportunities for greater commercialization through advertising on media that have not previously been exploited. In democratic societies, there is a tension between freedom of speech rights and the harm that might be done to children through commercial messages. This book explores all of these issues and looks to the future in considering how effective codes of practice and regulation will develop.