Caroline Mala Corbin
University of Miami School of Law
April 30, 2013
Alabama Law Review, Forthcoming
Courts have faced a wave of compelled disclosure cases recently. By government mandate, tobacco manufacturers must include graphic warnings on their cigarette packages, doctors must show and describe ultrasound images of fetuses to women seeking to abort them, and crisis pregnancy centers must disclose that they do not provide contraception or abortion services. Although applying the same compelled speech doctrine to similar issues, appeals courts have reached very different results in challenges to these laws. Drawing from First Amendment theory, this Article first identifies why compelled disclosures undermine free speech values. It then applies those insights to the specific examples above. In doing so, it examines not only compelled text but the new phenomenon of compelled images, particularly compelled images designed to provoke an emotional response. The Article concludes that recent appeals court decisions have it backwards: It is mandatory abortion counseling laws that offend free speech principles, not laws requiring cigarette warnings or crisis pregnancy center disclosures.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 68
Keywords: First Amendment, free speech, compelled speech, commercial speech, corporations, abortion, ultrasounds, crisis pregnancy centers, tobacco, law and emotion, heuristicsAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: May 1, 2013 ; Last revised: May 20, 2013
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 1.187 seconds