Term Talk

The Free Speech Clause. Experts discuss the Court’s clarification of content-based and content-neutral speech regulation, as well as the important distinction between government as speaker and government as creator of forums for private speech in First Amendment jurisprudence.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Michael McConnell, Professor, Stanford Law School; Jim Chance, Senior Judicial Education Attorney, Federal Judicial Center.

The Free Speech Clause. Experts discuss the authority of elected bodies to censure their members for speech and actions. They also discuss how the Court’s view of core political speech runs counter to congressional attempts to prevent financial misconduct during campaigns and undue influence after candidates are elected.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Michael McConnell, Professor, Stanford Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

The Establishment and Free Expression of Religion Clauses. Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Experts discuss the Court’s redefinition of government neutrality to require support of both secular and religious schools and the potential impact on government support of many secular activities going forward. Experts also discuss the exacting form of strict scrutiny the Court requires when the government restricts the religious activities of incarcerated persons in the context of the execution chamber.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Michael McConnell, Professor, Stanford Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

The Establishment and Free Expression of Religion Clauses. Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Experts discuss the Court’s redefinition of government neutrality to require support of both secular and religious schools and the potential impact on government support of many secular activities going forward. Experts also discuss the exacting form of strict scrutiny the Court requires when the government restricts the religious activities of incarcerated persons in the context of the execution chamber.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Michael McConnell, Professor, Stanford Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

The Establishment and Free Expression of Religion Clauses. Experts discuss school prayer and the Court’s displacement of the Lemon Test with an analysis of history and tradition.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Michael McConnell, Professor, Stanford Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

The Establishment and Free Expression of Religion Clauses. Experts discuss school prayer and the Court’s displacement of the Lemon Test with an analysis of history and tradition.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Michael McConnell, Professor, Stanford Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

The right to bear arms. Experts discuss the Court’s 2nd Amendment expansion to include the right to bear and keep arms outside of the home, and the difficulty of applying the Court’s historical analysis test to new regulations.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Tara Grove, Professor, UT Austin School of Law; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

The right to bear arms. Experts discuss the Court’s 2nd Amendment expansion to include the right to bear and keep arms outside of the home, and the difficulty of applying the Court’s historical analysis test to new regulations.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, UC Berkeley Law School; Tara Grove, Professor, UT Austin School of Law; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

Civil Rights. §1983. Malicious Prosecution and Miranda Warnings. Experts discuss how the Court resolved a circuit split as to what constitutes a favorable outcome allowing a claim for malicious prosecution to go forward, and whether violations of Miranda warning rules can support a claim under §1983.

Participants. Laurie Levenson, Professor, Loyola Law School; Evan Lee, Professor Emeritus, UC Hastings Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.

Civil Rights. §1983. Malicious Prosecution and Miranda Warnings. Experts discuss how the Court resolved a circuit split as to what constitutes a favorable outcome allowing a claim for malicious prosecution to go forward, and whether violations of Miranda warning rules can support a claim under §1983.

Participants. Laurie Levenson, Professor, Loyola Law School; Evan Lee, Professor Emeritus, UC Hastings Law School; Beth Wiggins, Director of Research, Federal Judicial Center.