Book contents
- The Disappearing First Amendment
- The Disappearing First Amendment
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Table of Cases
- 1 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back
- 2 The Public Forum Doctrine and Reduced Access to Government Property for Speech Activity
- 3 The First Amendment As a Source of Positive Rights
- 4 Whistleblowing Speech and Democratic Accountability
- 5 Shedding Their Constitutional Rights at the Schoolhouse Gate
- 6 Transborder Speech
- 7 Systemic Failures to Protect Newsgathering Activities by Professional Journalists and Amateur Citizen-Journalists Alike
- 8 The Citizen As Government Sock Puppet and the State Masquerading As a Citizen
- 9 Using Constitutionally Permissible Statutes to Impede First Amendment Activity
- 10 Conclusion
- Notes
- Index
3 - The First Amendment As a Source of Positive Rights
The Warren Court and First Amendment Easements to Private Property
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 August 2019
- The Disappearing First Amendment
- The Disappearing First Amendment
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Table of Cases
- 1 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back
- 2 The Public Forum Doctrine and Reduced Access to Government Property for Speech Activity
- 3 The First Amendment As a Source of Positive Rights
- 4 Whistleblowing Speech and Democratic Accountability
- 5 Shedding Their Constitutional Rights at the Schoolhouse Gate
- 6 Transborder Speech
- 7 Systemic Failures to Protect Newsgathering Activities by Professional Journalists and Amateur Citizen-Journalists Alike
- 8 The Citizen As Government Sock Puppet and the State Masquerading As a Citizen
- 9 Using Constitutionally Permissible Statutes to Impede First Amendment Activity
- 10 Conclusion
- Notes
- Index
Summary
The Warren Court’s creative use of the First Amendment as a font of affirmative governmental duties to facilitate speech related to the process of democratic self-government began, but did not end, with its decisions requiring the government to make public property available for speech activities.1 In addition, the Warren Court extended First Amendment rights of access to private property if particular privately owned property served as an essential locus of democratic deliberation2 – the contemporary equivalent of the municipal park at issue in Hague.3 Accordingly, even if a skeptical reader remains unconvinced by my claim that the Warren Court conceived of the First Amendment as a source of both positive and negative rights, its approach to mandating access to private property for First Amendment activity provides further, and quite striking, support for this argument.4
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Disappearing First Amendment , pp. 47 - 74Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019