Skip to content

Georgetown Law Library

Request Add to Bag MARC Display
Limit search to available items
Call # KF4550 .S76 2013
Author Stone, Geoffrey R
Title Constitutional law / Geoffrey R. Stone, Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law University of Chicago Law School ; Louis Michael Seidman, Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Constitutional Law, Georgetown University Law Center ; Cass R. Sunstein, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Harvard Law School ; Mark V. Tushnet William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Harvard Law School ; Pamela S. Karlan, Kenneth & Harle Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law, Stanford Law School
Imprint New York : Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2013
Edition Seventh edition
Book Cover
 CASEBOOK RESERVE  KF4550 .S76 2013    DUE 08-03-15
 WMS STACKS  KF4550 .S76 2013   Suppl.    AVAILABLE
 CASEBOOK RESERVE  KF4550 .S76 2013  Suppl. 2013    AVAILABLE
 CASEBOOK RESERVE  KF4550 .S76 2013  Suppl. 2013    AVAILABLE
 CASEBOOK RESERVE  KF4550 .S76 2013  Suppl. 2013    AVAILABLE
 SPEC COLL  Faculty publication   2013 Suppl.    SCRR USE ONLY


Descript. lxxxviii, 1684 pages ; 26 cm
Series Aspen casebook series
Aspen casebook series
Note Includes bibliographical references (pages xxxv-xxxviii) and index
Subject Constitutional law -- United States
Alt Author Seidman, Louis Michael
Sunstein, Cass R
Tushnet, Mark V., 1945-
Karlan, Pamela S
OCLC # 827724366
Table of Contents
 Editorial Noticexxxix
 Constitution of the United Statesxli
 Biographical Notes on Selected U.S. Supreme Court Justiceslvii
 Supreme Court since 1789lxxvii
I.Constitution and the Supreme Court1
A.Introduction: Creating a Constitution That Binds the Future1
 Note: Why (and How) Does the Constitution Bind?2
B.Origins of the U.S. Constitution7
1.Arguments over the New Constitution9
 Federalist No. 10 (Madison)11
 Note: Madisonian Republicanism15
 Federalist No. 51 (Madison)18
 Note: Madisonian Republicanism and Checks and Balances21
 Note: Madisonian Republicanism and Contemporary Constitutionalism23
C.Basic Framework25
 Marbury v. Madison25
 Note: Marbury v. Madison32
 Martin v. Hunter's Lessee38
 Note: Supreme Court Review of State Courts and State Laws42
 Note: Judicial Exclusivity in Constitutional Interpretation?44
D.Sources of Judicial Decisions: Text, "Representation-Reinforcement," and Natural Law48
 District of Columbia v. Heller48
 Note: Text and "Original Public Meaning"52
2.Structure and Improving Democratic Processes53
 McCulloch v. Maryland53
 Note: Constitutional Methodology and Interpretation in McCulloch62
3.Natural Law and Natural Rights65
 Calder v. Bull65
 Note: Natural Law, Moral Argument, and the Supreme Court67
E.Power of Political Control over the Supreme Court69
 Note: Amendment, Appointment, Impeachment, and the Election Returns70
 Ex parte McCardle75
 Note: Political Control over Jurisdiction of Article III Courts77
 Note: The Power of Reprisal --- General Thoughts81
F."Case or Controversy" Requirements and the Passive Virtues82
1.Advisory Opinions83
 Allen v. Wright85
 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife89
 Massachusetts v. EPA97
 Note: The Law of Standing106
 Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow118
 Note: Prudential Standing120
3.Political Questions121
 Baker v. Carr121
 Note: The Bases for Finding a Political Question126
 Note: The Development of Standards for Reviewing Political Fairness138
 Vieth v. Jubelirer139
 Bush v. Gore142
 Note: Political Questions and Partisan Issues149
4.Questions of Timing --- Ripeness and Mootness153
G.Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court155
 Note: Jurisdiction, Certiorari, and the U.S. Supreme Court155
II.Federalism at Work: Congress and the National Economy1
A.Values of Federalism and Some Techniques for Implementing Them159
 Note: A Government of Enumerated Powers159
 Note: The Values of Federalism161
B.Doctrinal Fundamentals: Federalism and Judicial Review165
 Gibbons v. Ogden165
 Note: Gibbons v. Ogden167
 Hammer v. Dagenhart (The Child Labor Case)169
 Wickard v. Filburn171
 Note: Political Constraints versus Judicial Enforcement172
C.Evolution of Commerce Clause Doctrine: The Lessons (?) of History179
 United States v. E. C. Knight Co.180
 Houston, East & West Texas Railway v. United States (The Shreveport Rate Cases)181
 Note: Direct, Indirect, and Stream of Commerce Tests182
 Champion v. Ames (The Lottery Case)183
 Note: Prohibiting Interstate Transportation --- Proper Regulation or Improper Pretext?185
 Note: The New Deal Crisis185
 A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States186
 Carter v. Carter Coal Co.188
 Note: New Deal Legislation and Commerce Clause Tests in the 1930s191
 NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.193
 United States v. Darby196
 Note: The New Deal Legacy198
 Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States199
 Katzenbach v. McClung200
 Note: Federalism and Congressional Motivation202
 United States v. Lopez203
 United States v. Morrison212
 Note: Federalism after the New Deal214
 National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius218
 Note: Activity and Inactivity239
 Note: Observations on Court-Imposed Limitations on Congress's Powers239
D.State Regulation of Interstate Commerce240
1.Fundamental Framework240
 Note: The Classical View240
 Note: The Modern View242
2.Protection against Discrimination246
 Note: General Considerations246
 City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey247
 Note: Facial/Intentional Discrimination249
 C & A Carbone, Inc. v. Clarkstown251
 Note: Geographic Discrimination255
 West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy258
 Note: The Alternative of Subsidies260
 Note: Other Doctrines Concerning Discrimination260
 Note: Concluding Observations264
3.Facially Neutral Statutes with Significant Effects on Interstate Commerce264
 Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission266
 Note: Inferring Intent from Effect267
 Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland269
 Note: Facially Neutral Statutes with (Merely?) Disproportionate Effects for Commercial or Social Purposes272
 Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corp.273
 Note: Facially Neutral Statutes with (Merely?) Disproportionate Effects for Police Power Purposes279
 Note: Taxation of Interstate Commerce281
 Arizona v. United States283
 Notes on Preemption288
 Note: Concluding Observations291
III.Scope of Congress's Powers: Taxing and Spending, War Powers, Individual Rights, and State Autonomy293
A.Regulation through Taxing, Spending, and the War Power294
1.Taxing Power294
 National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius296
 Note: NFIB's Discussion of the Taxing Power301
2.Spending Power301
 United States v. Butler301
 Note: The Spending Power and Dual Federalism306
 Steward Machine Co. v. Davis306
 Note: Conditional Spending, Coercion, and the Political Process309
 National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius310
 Note: Conditions and Coercion320
3."War" Power322
 Note: Individual Rights and the War Power324
B.Congress's Enforcement Power under the Reconstruction Amendments325
 Note: Possible Interpretations of the Section 5 Power326
 Katzenbach v. Morgan327
 Note: The Scope of Section 5329
 City of Boerne v. Flores331
 Note: The Roles of Court and Congress334
 Note: The Interaction of Congressional Enforcement Power and the Eleventh Amendment336
 Board of Trustees v. Garrett338
 Note: Congressional Power to Abrogate States' Sovereign Immunity339
 Note: Congressional Power to Regulate "Private" Action for Civil Rights Purposes344
C.Tenth Amendment as a Federalism-Based Limitation on Congressional Power346
 Missouri v. Holland347
 Note: Federalism and the Treaty Power348
 Note: The Modern Revival of Tenth Amendment--Based Restraints on Federal Regulation of State and Local Governments351
 Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority352
 Note: From Garcia to New York v. United States353
 New York v. United States354
 Printz v. United States356
 Note: The "Anticommandeering" Principle358
 Note: Concluding Observations on Congress's Powers365
IV.Distribution of National Powers367
 Federalist No. 47 (Madison)367
 Federalist No. 48 (Madison)368
 Note: The Theory of Separation and Checks and Balances368
B.Case Study: Presidential Seizure370
 Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (The Steel Seizure Case)370
 Note: Youngstown and the Power of the President378
 Note: The Relevance of Foreign Law380
C.Foreign Affairs382
1.Executive Authority382
 United States v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.382
 Dames & Moore v. Regan384
 Medellin v. Texas386
 Note: The President and Foreign Affairs388
 Note: The Allocation of Warmaking Authority389
 Note: The "War on Terror" and the Second Gulf War390
 Hamdi v. Rumsfeld392
 Note: The Interplay between the President, Congress, and the Court with Regard to the "War on Terror"400
 Note: Some Unanswered Questions403
2.Legislative Authority406
 Note: The War Powers Resolution406
 Note: Congressional Control over Agreements with Foreign States --- Treaties, Executive Agreements, and Congressional-Executive Agreements409
D.Domestic Affairs411
1.Executive Authority411
 United States v. Nixon412
 Note: Executive Privilege and Presidential Immunity416
 Note: The Politics of Impeachment420
 Note: The "Law" of Impeachment421
2.Legislative Authority424
 Note: The Nondelegation Doctrine and "Quasi-Constitutional" Statutes424
 INS v. Chadha429
 Note: The Legislative Veto434
 Note: Where Do Administrative Agencies "Fit" in the Separation of Powers Scheme?435
 Bowsher v. Synar439
 Morrison v. Olson441
 Note: Congressional Control over Administrative Officials448
 Note: Distribution of National Powers --- Final Thoughts451
V.Equality and the Constitution453
A.Slavery, Jim Crow, and the Equal Protection Principle453
1.Slavery and the Constitution454
 State v. Post455
 Note: The Constitutionality of Slavery457
 Dred Scott v. Sandford459
 Note: Dred Scott and the Power of Judicial Review461
2.Reconstruction and Retreat463
 Note: The Work of the Reconstruction Congress463
 Note: The Judicial Reaction465
 Plessy v. Ferguson468
 Note: Separate but Equal471
3.Attack on Jim Crow472
 Note: The Road to Brown473
 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown I)476
 Note: Justifications and Explanations for Brown478
 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Brown II)482
 Note: "All Deliberate Speed"484
4.Meaning of Brown485
 Note: The Initial Response to Brown485
 Note: The De Jure/De Facto Distinction and Limits on Courts' Remedial Powers489
B.Equal Protection Methodology: Rational Basis Review497
 New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer498
 Note: Equal Treatment and Relevant Differences501
 Note: Limitations on Permissible Government Purposes503
 U.S. Department of Agriculture v. Moreno504
 City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center505
 Romer v. Evans506
 Note: "Actual Purpose" Review508
 Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co.509
 Note: The Means-Ends Nexus513
 Railway Express Agency v. New York516
 Williamson v. Lee Optical517
C.Equal Protection Methodology: Heightened Scrutiny and the Problem of Race520
1.Origins and Rationale for Heightened Scrutiny in Race-Specific Classifications That Disadvantage Racial Minorities521
 Strauder v. West Virginia521
 Korematsu v. United States523
 Loving v. Virginia527
 Note: Doctrinal Evolution in the Scrutiny Applied to Racial Classifications528
 Note: Justifications for Strict Scrutiny of Racial Classifications530
 Note: The Structure of Strict Scrutiny535
2.Facially Nonracial Classifications That Disadvantage Racial Minorities: When Does Heightened Scrutiny Apply?540
 Washington v. Davis540
 Note: Rational Basis Review of Non--Race-Specific Classifications542
 Note: What Constitutes a Racially Motivated Classification?: Questions of Discriminatory Purpose544
 Note: Distinctive Problems in the Administration of Criminal Justice551
 McCleskey v. Kemp554
 Note: Racial Disparities in Investigating, Charging, and Sentencing559
3.Race-Specific Classifications Designed to Benefit Racial Minorities562
 Note: The Imposition of Strict Scrutiny562
 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena567
 Note: The Constitutionality of "Benign" Racial Classifications574
 Grutter v. Bollinger580
 Note: The Contemporary Application of Strict Scrutiny591
 Gratz v. Bollinger595
 Note: The Special Problem of Facially Neutral but Race-Specific Voting Districts599
 Note: The "Special" Case of Indigenous People605
 Note: A Comparative Perspective606
4.Synthesis of Brown and Affirmative Action608
 Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1608
 Note: Parents Involved and the Synthesis of Equal Protection Law624
D.Equal Protection Methodology: Heightened Scrutiny and the Problem of Gender629
1.Early Cases629
2.Road to Intermediate Scrutiny631
 Reed v. Reed631
 Frontiero v. Richardson631
 Note: From Reed to Craig v. Boren --- Evolution and Doctrinal Confusion633
 Craig v. Boren637
 Note: Heightened Scrutiny for Gender Classifications?642
3.Archaic and Overbroad Generalizations versus "Real" Differences647
 United States v. Virginia647
 Note: "Real Differences" and Formal Equality654
 Nguyen v. Immigration & Naturalization Service658
 Note: The Relevance of "Real Differences"662
 Note: Gender Discrimination as a Two-Edged Sword666
 Califano v. Goldfarb667
 Califano v. Webster669
 Note: The Problem of "Benign" Gender Classifications670
 Note: Sex Discrimination Law and Constitutional Evolution671
E.Equal Protection Methodology: The Problem of Sexual Orientation673
 Note: The Nature of the Class at Issue673
 Romer v. Evans675
 Note: The Meaning of Romer683
 Note: The Standard of Review685
F.Equal Protection Methodology: Other Candidates for Heightened Scrutiny696
 Sugarman v. Dougall697
 Note: Strict Scrutiny for Classifications Based on Alienage --- Defining the Political Community700
 Note: Alienage and Federal Preemption703
2.Wealth Classifications707
 Note: Defining the Class707
 Note: Wealth Discrimination and the Problem of Affirmative Rights709
3.Other Disadvantaged Groups714
 City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center714
 Note: Evaluating the Claims of Other Disadvantaged Groups716
VI.Implied Fundamental Rights721
 Note: Theories of Constitutional Interpretation --- "Originalism" and Its Critics722
B.Privileges or Immunities Clause729
 Slaughter-House Cases730
 Note: The Demise of the Privileges or Immunities Clause735
C.Due Process Clause and the Incorporation Controversy739
 Note: Due Process and Incorporation739
 McDonald v. City of Chicago741
D.Substantive Due Process: The Protection of Economic Interests and the Question of Redistribution750
 Note: The Road to Lochner750
 Lochner v. New York753
 Note: The (Alleged?) Vices of Lochner758
 Note: The Lochner Era, 1905--1934764
 Nebbia v. New York766
 West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish767
 Note: The Context of West Coast Hotel and the 1930s Political and Economic Climate768
 Note: The End of an Era769
 United States v. Carolene Products Co.770
 Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma771
 Ferguson v. Skrupa772
 Note: Pluralism, Naked Wealth Transfers, and the Courts773
E.Fundamental Interests and the Equal Protection Clause776
 Skinner v. Oklahoma776
 Note: The Fundamental "Right to Have Offspring"778
a.Denial of the "Right to Vote"780
 Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections781
 Note: Is the Right to Vote "Fundamental"?782
 Kramer v. Union Free School District784
 Note: Kramer and Its Progeny785
b.Dilution of the "Right to Vote"788
 Reynolds v. Sims789
 Note: Reynolds and Its Progeny792
 City of Mobile v. Bolden795
 Note: Vote Dilution and the Interests of Groups799
c.Denial of "Access to the Ballot"803
 Williams v. Rhodes803
 Note: Williams and Its Progeny804
2.Access to the Judicial Process807
 Griffin v. Illinois807
 Douglas v. California807
 Note: Fundamental Interests and the Criminal Justice System808
 Boddie v. Connecticut812
 Note: Access to the Judicial Process in Civil Cases813
 Shapiro v. Thompson814
 Saenz v. Roe818
 Note: The Right to Travel as a "Fundamental Interest"819
 Note: "Penalizing" the Right to Travel820
 Dandridge v. Williams825
 Note: Dandridge and the Judicial Role in the Welfare Context826
 San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez828
 Note: The Rodriguez Formulation834
 Plyler v. Doe835
 Note: Plyler and the Equal Protection Clause840
F.Modern Substantive Due Process: Privacy, Personhood, and Family841
1.Right of Privacy842
 Griswold v. Connecticut842
 Note: Griswold and the Right of Privacy850
 Roe v. Wade854
 Note: The Abortion Decision859
 Maher v. Roe866
 Harris v. McRae868
 Note: The Abortion-Funding Cases869
 Note: Abortion Regulation between Roe and Casey870
 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey873
 Note: Casey and the Role of the Court892
 Gonzales v. Carhart893
 Note: The Future of Abortion Rights907
3.Family and Other "Privacy" Interests909
 Moore v. City of East Cleveland909
 Note: Family and Association910
 Zablocki v. Redhail913
 Note: Families, Marriage, and Tradition915
 Note: Intimate and Cultural Association920
 Bowers v. Hardwick921
 Lawrence v. Texas922
 Note: Homosexuality, Sexual Liberty, and Substantive Due Process932
 Note: Same-Sex Marriage934
4.Right to Die937
 Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health937
 Note: The Right to Die943
 Washington v. Glucksberg944
 Note: Assisted Suicide951
 Note: Liberty, Property, and Substantive Due Process951
G.Procedural Due Process953
1.Liberty and Property Interests953
 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth954
 Perry v. Sindermann955
 Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill956
 Note: Defining "Liberty" and "Property"958
 Note: Statutory Entitlements, Property, and Natural Liberty959
2.What Process Is Due962
 Mathews v. Eldridge962
 Note: Balancing Tests and the Due Process Clause966
 Note: Procedural Due Process and "Legislative" Determinations972
H.Contracts and Takings Clauses973
1.Contracts Clause973
 Note: Early Interpretive Problems973
 Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell976
 Note: Market Ordering and Constitutional Interpretation979
 United States Trust Co. v. New Jersey980
 Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus982
 Note: United States Trust, Spannaus, and the Nonrevival of the Contracts Clause984
2.Eminent Domain Clause986
 Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff986
 Note: The Public Use Requirement and the Takings Clause988
 Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon991
 Miller v. Schoene993
 Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City995
 Keystone Bituminous Coal Association v. DeBenedictis1000
 Note: "Takings" and the Police Power1001
 Note: Penn Central, Keystone, Takings, and Related Problems1004
 Nollan v. California Coastal Commission1008
 Note: Nollan, Unconstitutional Conditions, and Other Problems1010
 Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council1013
 Note: Lucas, the Environment, and Regulatory Takings1020
 Palazzolo v. Rhode Island1022
 Note: Palazzolo --- Final Thoughts1026
VII.Freedom of Expression1027
 Note: The History of Free Expression1027
 Note: The Philosophy of Free Expression1032
 Note: Organization1037
B.Content-Based Restrictions: Dangerous Ideas and Information1038
1.Speech That "Causes" Unlawful Conduct1038
 Shaffer v. United States1039
 Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten1040
 Schenck v. United States1043
 Note: Shaffer, Masses, and Schenck1044
 Frohwerk v. United States1047
 Debs v. United States1047
 Abrams v. United States1048
 Note: Abrams and the Emergence of the Holmes-Brandeis Tradition1051
 Gitlow v. New York1053
 Note: "Abstract Doctrine" versus "Urging to Action"1056
 Whitney v. California1057
 Note: The Brandeis Concurrence and the Road to Dennis1060
 Dennis v. United States1062
 Note: Dennis and the Communist "Conspiracy"1067
 Note: The Road to Brandenburg1070
 Brandenburg v. Ohio1072
 Note: The Brandenburg Formulation1074
 Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project1076
 Note: Abridgment of Speech Other Than by Direct Criminal Prohibition1078
2.Speech That Provokes a Hostile Audience Reaction1083
 Terminiello v. Chicago1083
 Cantwell v. Connecticut1084
 Feiner v. New York1085
 Note: The Search for Mechanisms of Control1088
 Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire1091
 Note: Fighting Words1093
 Note: The Skokie Controversy1096
 Snyder v. Phelps1098
3.Classified Information1100
 New York Times Co. v. United States; United States v. Washington Post Co.1100
 Note: The Pentagon Papers Controversy1108
 Note: The Progressive Controversy1112
 Note: The WikiLeaks Controversy1114
 Note: Dangerous Ideas and Information --- Final Thoughts1115
C.Overbreadth, Vagueness, and Prior Restraint1116
1.Overbreadth and Vagueness1116
 Gooding v. Wilson1116
 Note: Overbreadth1119
 Note: Vagueness1122
2.Prior Restraint1124
 Lovell v. Griffin1125
 Note: Licensing as Prior Restraint1126
 Near v. Minnesota1129
 Note: Injunction as Prior Restraint1131
D.Content-Based Restrictions: "Low" Value1134
1.False Statements of Fact1135
 New York Times v. Sullivan1135
 Note: "The Central Meaning" of New York Times v. Sullivan1140
 Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts; Associated Press v. Walker1143
 Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.1144
 Note: Public and Private Figures, Public and Private Speech1146
 Dun & Bradstreet v. Greenmoss Builders1148
 Note: Other False Statements of Fact1148
 United States v. Alvarez1149
 Hustler Magazine v. Falwell1153
2."Nonnewsworthy" Disclosures of "Private" Information1155
 Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn1155
 Note: Invasion of Privacy and the First Amendment1158
 Bridges v. California1161
 Watts v. United States1162
 Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists1163
4.Commercial Advertising1165
 Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council1166
 Note: Virginia Pharmacy and "the Free Flow of Commercial Information"1172
 Note: Truthful, Nondeceptive Commercial Advertising after Virginia Pharmacy1174
 Central Hudson Gas v. Public Service Commission of New York1175
 Note: Truthful, Nondeceptive Commercial Advertising1176
 Note: Other Regulations of Commercial Advertising1180
 Roth v. United States; Alberts v. California1184
 Note: Obscenity and Free Expression1185
 Note: Developments in the Law of "Obscenity" --- 1957--19731189
 Miller v. California1192
 Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton1195
 Note: The 1973 Reformulation and Its Aftermath1198
6.Child Pornography, Animal Cruelty, and Violent Expression1201
 New York v. Ferber1201
 Ashcroft v. The Free Speech Coalition1203
 Note: Child Pornography1206
 United States v. Stevens1208
 Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association1211
7.Lewd, the Profane, and the Indecent1214
 Cohen v. California1215
 Note: Profanity, Cohen, and the Captive Audience1218
 Erznoznik v. Jacksonville1221
 FCC v. Pacifica Foundation1222
 Note: Fleeting Expletives1224
 Sable Communications, Inc. v. FCC1225
 Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union1226
 Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union1227
 Note: "Indecent" Expression1229
 Note: Zoning Theaters with Adult Movies and Bars with Nude Dancing1232
8.Hate Speech and Pornography1236
 Beauhamais v. Illinois1236
 Note: Group Defamation and "Hate Speech"1239
 R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul1243
 Wisconsin v. Mitchell1248
 Note: R.A.V. and Mitchell1248
 Virginia v. Black1251
 Note: R.A.V. and Black1258
 Note: Pornography and the Victimization of Women1259
 Note: "Low" Value Speech --- Final Thoughts1262
E.Content-Neutral Restrictions: Limitations on the Means of Communication and the Problem of Content-Neutrality1263
1.General Principles1264
 Schneider v. State1264
 Martin v. City of Struthers1265
 Kovacs v. Cooper1266
 Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego1266
 City of Ladue v. Gilleo1267
 Bartnicki v. Vopper1268
 Note: The Search for Principles1270
 Note: The Meaning of "Content-Neutrality"1271
2.Speech on Public Property: The Public Forum1274
a.Public Forum: Streets and Parks1275
 Commonwealth v. Davis1275
 Hague v. CIO1276
 Schneider v. State1277
 Note: Regulating the Public Forum1278
 Note: Devices for Regulating the Public Forum1282
b.Public Forum: Other Publicly Owned Property1285
 Adderley v. Florida1285
 Note: "No Less Than a Private Owner of Property"?1287
 International Society for Krishna Consciousness v. Lee1291
 Note: Modern Public Forum Doctrine1293
 Note: The Right to a "Private" Forum1294
c.Public Forum: Unequal Access and the Problem of Content-Neutrality1296
 Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley1296
 Note: Mosley and the "Equality" of Ideas1298
 Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights1300
 Note: Lehman and the Limits of Mosley1304
 Perry Educators' Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association1305
 Note: Quintessential, Designated, and Nonpublic Forums1307
 Note: Religious Expression and the Meaning of "Viewpoint Neutrality"1311
 Christian Legal Society Chapter v. Martinez1314
d.Unequal Access and the Problem of Government Speech1317
 Southeastern Promotions v. Conrad1317
 Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico1319
 Regan v. Taxation with Representation of Washington1321
 Rust v. Sullivan1322
 Note: The Implications of Rust1324
 National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley1326
 Legal Services Corp: v. Velazquez1329
 Note: The Reach of Government Speech1332
3.Symbolic Conduct1337
 United States v. O'Brien1338
 Note: Draft Card Burning and the First Amendment1342
 Note: Flag Desecration and Misuse1348
 Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc.1353
 City of Erie v. Pap's A.M.1355
 Note: Other Forms of Symbolic Speech1357
4.Regulation of Political Solicitation, Contribution, Expenditure, and Activity1359
 Buckley v. Valeo1359
 Note: Buckley and the Problem of Abridging Speech to "Enhance" the Electoral Process1367
 Note: Subsidy and Disclosure1370
 Note: Contribution Limits, PACs, and Political Parties1374
 McConnell v. Federal Election Commission1375
 Davis v. Federal Election Commission1378
 Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett1378
 Note: Corporate Contributions and Expenditures1381
 Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission1385
 Note: Reflections on Citizens United1397
 Note: Additional Regulation of the Electoral Process1400
 Note: Regulating the Political Activities of Public Employees1402
5.Other Means of Expression: Litigation, Association, and the Right Not to Speak1405
 NAACP v. Button1405
 Note: Litigation and the First Amendment1406
 NAACP v. Alabama1408
 Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees1409
 Note: Association and the First Amendment1410
 Boy Scouts of America v. Dale1411
 Note: The Meaning of Dale1414
 PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins1415
 Note: Compelled Affirmation, Expression, and Association: The Right Not to Speak1415
 Note: Content-Neutral Restrictions --- Final Thoughts1419
F.Freedom of the Press1420
1."Preferred" Status for the Press?1420
2.Right to "Gather" News?1421
 Branzburg v. Hayes1421
 Note: A Right to Gather News?1425
 Note: A Press Right of Access to Information?1427
 Richmond Newspapers v. Virginia1429
 Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court1431
 Note: Variations on the Press Right of Access1432
3.Differential Treatment of the Press1433
 Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue1433
 Note: Differential Treatment1436
4.Regulating the Press to "Improve" the Marketplace of Ideas1437
 Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo1437
 Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC1438
 Note: Regulating the Airwaves1440
 Turner Broadcasting System Inc. v. FCC1444
 Note: Turner and the Regulation of Cable1447
 Note: The First Amendment in Cyberspace1447
 Note: Free Expression --- Final Thoughts1451
VIII.Constitution and Religion1453
A.Introduction: Historical and Analytical Overview1453
 Everson v. Board of Education1453
 Note: The History of the Religion Clauses1455
 Note: General Approaches to the Religion Clauses1462
 Note: Defining Religion1467
B.Establishment Clause1470
1.Anticoercion Principle1471
 Lee v. Weisman1471
 Note: The Anticoercion Principle1479
2.Nonendorsement Principle and De Facto Establishments1482
 Lynch v. Donnelly1482
 Note: The Nonendorsement Principle1488
3.Impermissible Purposes: The School Prayer Cases1496
 Note: Problems with a "Purpose" Test1496
4.Facially Neutral Statutes That Incidentally Aid Religion: Permissible and Impermissible Effects1502
 Note: The Problem and Its Background1502
 Mueller v. Allen1504
 Note: From Aguilar to Mitchell1508
 Zelman v. Simmons-Harris1513
 Note: Purpose and Effect in Aid to Nonpublic Education --- Benevolent Neutrality?1515
 Note: Concluding Observations1520
C.Free Exercise Clause: Required Accommodations1521
 Note: From Reynolds to Smith1521
 Braunfeld v. Brown1522
 Sherbert v. Verner1522
 Wisconsin v. Yoder1523
 Note: Problems of Mandatory Accommodation1525
 Employment Division, Department of Human Resources v. Smith1528
 Note: Should Accommodation Be Required?1536
D.Permissible Accommodation1538
 Corporation of Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos1539
 Texas Monthly v. Bullock1543
 Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet1544
 Note: When --- If Ever --- Should Accommodations of Religion Be Permitted?1546
E.Free Exercise, Free Speech, and the Right of Expressive Association1549
 Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC1549
 Note: The Relation between the Religion Clauses and Other Protections of Expression1550
 Note: Concluding Observations1554
IX.State Action, Baselines, and the Problem of Private Power1555
A.State Action, Federalism, and Individual Autonomy1556
1.State Action and Federalism1556
 Civil Rights Cases1556
 Note: Federalism and the Substantive Content of the State Action Doctrine1559
2.State Action and Individual Autonomy1560
B.Pure Inaction and the Theory of Governmental Neutrality1562
1.Pure Inaction1562
 DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services1562
 Flagg Brothers v. Brooks1564
 Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co.1568
 Note: The Problem of the Passive State1569
2.Judicial Action and the Theory of Government Neutrality1573
 Shelley v. Kraemer1573
 Note: Shelley v. Kraemer, State Inaction, and the Theory of Government Neutrality1576
C.Constitutionally Impermissible Departures from Neutrality: State Subsidization, Approval, and Encouragement1582
1.State Subsidization of Private Conduct1582
 Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority1582
 Note: Subsidies, Penalties, and the Search for a Baseline1584
 Rendell-Baker v. Kohn1587
 San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee1588
 Note: State Action as Coercion or Significant Encouragement1589
2.State Licensing and Authorization1592
 Public Utilities Commission v. Pollak1592
 Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis1592
 Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.1594
 Note: Licensing, Authorization, and Entwinement as State Action1596
D.Constitutionally Required Departures from Neutrality: The Public Function Doctrine1597
 Marsh v. Alabama1597
 Note: The "Public Function" Theory and the Passive State1599
 Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.1604
 Note: Public Functions as "Exclusive Prerogatives" of the State1605
E.Unconstitutional Conditions and the Benefit/Burden Distinction1608
 Rust v. Sullivan1609
 Maher v. Roe1610
 National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius1611
 Nollan v. California Coastal Commission1613
 Note: Benefits, Burdens, and Coercion1614
F.Some Final Thoughts1620
 Table of Cases1621
 Table of Authorities1641