Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1135363
 
 

Footnotes (416)



 


 



Brandenburg in a Time of Terror


Thomas Healy


Seton Hall University - School of Law

2008

Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 84, 2008
Seton Hall Public Law Research Paper No. 1135363

Abstract:     
For four decades, the Supreme Court's decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio has been celebrated as a landmark in First Amendment law. In one short unsigned opinion, the Court distanced itself from the embarrassment of the Red Scare and adopted a highly protective test that permits advocacy of unlawful conduct in all but the most dangerous cases. But 9/11 and the threat of terrorism pose a new challenge to Brandenburg. Although the government has not resorted to the excesses of McCarthyism, it has taken disturbing steps to silence the speech of political dissenters. These efforts raise questions about the adequacy of Brandenburg to protect speech during a time of crisis and fear. They also highlight ambiguities in the Brandenburg test that have been largely ignored by courts and scholars. For instance, does Brandenburg apply during war as well as peace? Does it apply to private advocacy as well as public advocacy? And is there anything about the current terrorist threat that would make its protections inapplicable?

To answer these and other important questions, this Article undertakes a comprehensive reexamination of Brandenburg and the issue of criminal advocacy. It begins by demonstrating that Brandenburg has been gradually eroded by lower courts, both before and after 9/11. It then examines two fundamental questions at the heart of Brandenburg that have never been adequately answered: (1) Why should criminal advocacy be protected in the first place? and (2) How much protection should it receive? The Article argues that criminal advocacy should be protected because it furthers the underlying values of the First Amendment, including the search for truth, self-government, and self-fulfillment. It then rejects claims that criminal advocacy should receive less than full protection and explains, for the first time, that Brandenburg is properly understood as an application of strict scrutiny to a particular category of speech. Finally, the Article draws upon this reconceptualization of Brandenburg to resolve the many ambiguities in its framework.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 75

Keywords: Brandenburg, free speech, first amendment, incitement, terrorism, criminal advocacy

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: May 21, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Healy, Thomas, Brandenburg in a Time of Terror (2008). Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 84, 2008; Seton Hall Public Law Research Paper No. 1135363. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1135363

Contact Information

Thomas Healy (Contact Author)
Seton Hall University - School of Law ( email )
One Newark Center
Newark, NJ 07102-5210
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 905
Downloads: 159
Download Rank: 112,994
Footnotes:  416

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.313 seconds