Preserving Political Speech from Ourselves and Others

19 Pages Posted: 14 Jan 2012

See all articles by Aziz Z. Huq

Aziz Z. Huq

University of Chicago - Law School

Date Written: January 13, 2012


This Essay is a case study of how and why strict scrutiny varies between cases decided within a particular doctrinal category (political speech) by a given court (the Roberts Court). Two lines of Roberts Court jurisprudence implicate political speech: federal campaign finance cases and a challenge to the federal statute criminalizing “material support” to designated foreign terrorist organizations. My aim here is to examine the common doctrinal matrix of First Amendment strict scrutiny used in those cases to explore how divergent results emerge from a unified analytic framework. A secondary goal is to illustrate how post-9/11 national security concerns find expression inside familiar and seemingly durable doctrinal frameworks.

Suggested Citation

Huq, Aziz Z., Preserving Political Speech from Ourselves and Others (January 13, 2012). Columbia Law Review Sidebar, Forthcoming; U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 374. Available at SSRN:

Aziz Z. Huq (Contact Author)

University of Chicago - Law School ( email )

1111 E. 60th St.
Chicago, IL 60637
United States

Register to save articles to
your library


Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics