|
||||
|
||||
There is No First Amendment Overbreadth (But There are Vague First Amendment Doctrines); Prior Restraints Aren’t ‘Prior’; and ‘As Applied’ Challenges Seek Judicial Statutory AmendmentsLarry AlexanderUniversity of San Diego School of Law January 26, 2011 Constitutional Commentary, Forthcoming San Diego Legal Studies Paper No. 11-048 Abstract: In this short paper I argue that there are no overbroad statutes, and that the worry about overbreadth is really a worry about the vagueness of some First Amendment doctrines. I further argue that there is nothing “prior” about prior restraints; the temporal worry about injunctions is due to the judicially-created collateral bar doctrine, and the temporal worry about licensing schemes is that of the delay occasioned by the license requirement. Finally, I argue that “as applied” constitutional analysis is an exercise in judicial statutory amendment. I conclude with an Appendix discussing two recent prominent articles that are inconsistent with some of my arguments.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 19 Keywords: First Amendment, Overbreadth, Vagueness, Prior Restraint, As Applied, Facial JEL Classification: K10, K39 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: January 27, 2011Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo8 in 1.109 seconds