False Speech: Quagmire

Christopher P. Guzelian

Thomas Jefferson School of Law

April 4, 2013

San Diego Law Review, Forthcoming
Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper

Recently decided cases in several Federal Courts of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court demonstrate that First Amendment false speech case law is contradictory and unpredictable. This essay gives examples and concludes that legal liability for false speech will continue to be arbitrary and even susceptible to intentionally unjust decisionmaking if judges and juries individually and collectively disregard or downplay the necessity of an honest search for truth in the guise of tolerance and evenhandedness.

If Americans wish to avoid an anything-goes “quagmire,” they must — despite inevitable resistance in a civilization increasingly rife with skeptics — undergo transformations of their thinking habits so as to genuinely seek and successfully identify truth with charitable application in law. In addition, a certain kind of optimism is necessary to render consistent and correct conclusions in false speech cases. This article’s implications may also extend beyond false speech to other areas of constitutional and common law.

Keywords: false speech, First Amendment

JEL Classification: K19, K30

Accepted Paper Series

Not Available For Download

Date posted: April 6, 2013 ; Last revised: November 17, 2013

Suggested Citation

Guzelian, Christopher P., False Speech: Quagmire (April 4, 2013). San Diego Law Review, Forthcoming; Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2245157

Contact Information

Christopher P. Guzelian (Contact Author)
Thomas Jefferson School of Law ( email )
1155 Island Ave
San Diego, CA 92101
United States
619-961-4248 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 192

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 8.126 seconds