SCOTUS Review: The Roberts Court and the First Amendment

The 2016 -17 Term of the U.S. Supreme Court was not packed with blockbusters, but it included three First Amendment decisions of particular interest. In Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, the Court sought to clarify the line between speech and conduct in the context of the regulation of credit card surcharges; in Matal v. Tam the court struck down the Lanham Act’s “disparagement clause”; and in Packingham v. North Carolina, the Court set aside a state law that limited sex offenders access to websites on which children had accounts. In each of these 8-Justice decisions, the Court adopted a more speech-protective position and did so without dissent. On the other hand, in each decision, there were significant divisions among the justices as to rationale. This program, taught by Michael Herz of the Cardozo School of Law, will unpack the reasoning, premise, and implications of the three decisions.

Learning Objectives:

1. Understand the reasoning and holdings of Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, Matal v. Tam, and Packingham v. North Carolina
2. Gain insight into the Roberts Court’s overall approach to First Amendment protections
3. Consider what larger trends these three decisions illustrate and implications they may have for future litigation