Artwork

Contenuto fornito da Institute for Justice. Tutti i contenuti dei podcast, inclusi episodi, grafica e descrizioni dei podcast, vengono caricati e forniti direttamente da Institute for Justice o dal partner della piattaforma podcast. Se ritieni che qualcuno stia utilizzando la tua opera protetta da copyright senza la tua autorizzazione, puoi seguire la procedura descritta qui https://it.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - App Podcast
Vai offline con l'app Player FM !

Short Circuit 332 | Not-So Government Speech

51:18
 
Condividi
 

Manage episode 428434636 series 75518
Contenuto fornito da Institute for Justice. Tutti i contenuti dei podcast, inclusi episodi, grafica e descrizioni dei podcast, vengono caricati e forniti direttamente da Institute for Justice o dal partner della piattaforma podcast. Se ritieni che qualcuno stia utilizzando la tua opera protetta da copyright senza la tua autorizzazione, puoi seguire la procedura descritta qui https://it.player.fm/legal.

This episode is a First Amendment 2-4-1. We begin with James Dickey of the Upper Midwest Law Center (and former golf pro). James tells us about a recent case he argued at the Eighth Circuit concerning the “government speech” doctrine. If a public school lets some people—but not others with a different viewpoint—come in and hang posters is that just fine because it’s the “government” speaking? In keeping with some recent Supreme Court rulings, the court said no, letting the case go forward. Then IJ’s campaign finance guru Paul Sherman steps forward to tease out a confusing opinion of the Second Circuit about a New York law that allows big contributions to big political parties but much smaller contributions to much smaller groups. It seems the reasoning is that major parties are above suspicion. Can that be right? Paul doesn’t think so.

Cajune v. Ind. Sch. Dist. 194

Upstate Jobs Party v. Kosinski

Huizenga v. Ind. Sch. Dist. 11

  continue reading

430 episodi

Artwork
iconCondividi
 
Manage episode 428434636 series 75518
Contenuto fornito da Institute for Justice. Tutti i contenuti dei podcast, inclusi episodi, grafica e descrizioni dei podcast, vengono caricati e forniti direttamente da Institute for Justice o dal partner della piattaforma podcast. Se ritieni che qualcuno stia utilizzando la tua opera protetta da copyright senza la tua autorizzazione, puoi seguire la procedura descritta qui https://it.player.fm/legal.

This episode is a First Amendment 2-4-1. We begin with James Dickey of the Upper Midwest Law Center (and former golf pro). James tells us about a recent case he argued at the Eighth Circuit concerning the “government speech” doctrine. If a public school lets some people—but not others with a different viewpoint—come in and hang posters is that just fine because it’s the “government” speaking? In keeping with some recent Supreme Court rulings, the court said no, letting the case go forward. Then IJ’s campaign finance guru Paul Sherman steps forward to tease out a confusing opinion of the Second Circuit about a New York law that allows big contributions to big political parties but much smaller contributions to much smaller groups. It seems the reasoning is that major parties are above suspicion. Can that be right? Paul doesn’t think so.

Cajune v. Ind. Sch. Dist. 194

Upstate Jobs Party v. Kosinski

Huizenga v. Ind. Sch. Dist. 11

  continue reading

430 episodi

Tutti gli episodi

×
 
Loading …

Benvenuto su Player FM!

Player FM ricerca sul web podcast di alta qualità che tu possa goderti adesso. È la migliore app di podcast e funziona su Android, iPhone e web. Registrati per sincronizzare le iscrizioni su tutti i tuoi dispositivi.

 

Guida rapida