Reconciling Theory and Doctrine in First Amendment Jurisprudence

35 Pages Posted: 28 Feb 2000

Date Written: January 2000

Abstract

The twentieth century has seen the birth and the development of the doctrine of the First Amendment's free speech clause. In its current state, free speech jurisprudence is hampered by coexisting but conflicting First Amendment theories and doctrines. In this Essay, Professor Post examines these conflicts. He traces the development of two primary First Amendment theories: the theory of the marketplace of ideas, exemplified by Justices Holmes' dissenting opinion in Abrams v. United States; and the theory of democratic speech, articulated most notably by Alexander Meiklejohn. After discussing the doctrinal implications of these theories and noting that courts have not followed either theory consistently, Professor Post suggests that First amendment jurisprudence could be rendered more coherent if First Amendment theories were to be ordered according to a "lexical priority" that will illuminate what is at stake in the conflict between theories and how such conflicts may be settled.

Suggested Citation

Post, Robert, Reconciling Theory and Doctrine in First Amendment Jurisprudence (January 2000). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=208090 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.208090

Robert Post (Contact Author)

Yale Law School ( email )

P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
538
Abstract Views
2,501
Rank
95,115
PlumX Metrics