Free Speech and Pornography: A Response to James Weinstein
Introduction
Professor James Weinstein offers a new iteration of an old argument, which holds that the suppression of pornography raises no free speech issue at all. Weinstein’s reformulation is a valuable contribution, not least because it captures an intuition that is shared by many, including, evidently, the Supreme Court. But the argument fails. It is a mistake to pretend that, when we suppress pornography, we are not infringing on values that lie at the heart of free speech.
Suggested Reading
My Twenty-Twos: Mentoring the Young Men Emerging Community
The kid’s name was Lil’ Yo—well, that’s what all his little buddies called him—and immediately his presence snagged my attention.
Labor Law and the NLRB: Friend or Foe to Labor and Non-Union Workers?
Wilma B. Liebman{{Former Member and Chairman, National Labor Relations Board, 1997-2011; visiting distinguished scholar Rutgers University School of Management and Labor Relations 2015-17; adjunct faculty, NYU Law School, spring 2015 and 2016. This article is based on remarks at the
Conservative Progressivism in Immigrant Habeas Court: Why Boumediene v. Bush is the Baseline Constitutional Minimum
Ever since Boumediene was decided federal judges have not applied the full force of all six of Boumediene’s holdings to immigrant habeas cases, and as a direct result immigration advocates lost their most important cases to date.
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
I understood death to be an essential part of life, but understanding this fact still didn’t make the experience of losing someone dear any easier.