Publisher's Synopsis
This widely-adopted softcover casebook, adapted from Choper, Dorf, Fallon, and Schauer's Constitutional Law but with numerous additional references and comments, is designed for a two- or three-unit course in the First Amendment. The new Eighth Edition has been thoroughly revised, tightened, and updated. The materials are presented in a way that permits instructors to depart from the organization of the casebook with relative ease. The book exposes students to original perspectives they might otherwise miss. Notes and questions enable students to study the variety of competing views embodying the First Amendment as they emerge from concrete cases rather than imposing an abstract characterization and classification on the student at the outset of the study. Extensive references help students to situate the cases within larger academic and theoretical debates.The new edition of the casebook continues with further modifications the revised organization from the Seventh Edition of the basic freedom of speech materials on content regulation, forum analysis, and the coverage/scope of the First Amendment, and further includes a large number of new cases and references. There has been substantial editing to make way for the new material, and thus the book remains of appropriate size for either a two- or three-unit course. The new speech cases described in detail in the Eighth Edition cover issues of content regulation (Austin v. Reagan National Advertising and Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants), government speech (Shurtleff v. City of Boston), offensive speech (Lancu v. Brunetti), elections (FEC v. Cruz), and speech by students and faculty in school settings (both Mahanoy School District v. B.L. and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District are treated as principal cases). On freedom of religion, the changes from the 7th edition are especially extensive, with both Carson v. Makin (financial assistance for religious schools) and Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (prayer by faculty in school setting) included as principal cases, and American Legion v. American Humanist Association (public religious symbols) and Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (financial assistance for religious school tuition) described at length. In addition, there is extensive coverage of the new cases, some part of the so-called shadow docket and some not, involving claimed exemptions on religious grounds from laws of general application, including laws requiring vaccination and laws prohibiting various forms of discrimination, all putting additional pressure on the continued viability of Employment Division v. Smith.
