Electoral Lies and the Broader Problems of Strict Scrutiny
States often attempt to regulate political speech in the form of deliberate lies related to ballot initiatives, referenda, candidates, or their political positions. Some courts focus on the various harms of electoral lies, while others focus more on the risks of bias and partisan abuse involved in such speech regulations, and the cases are in disarray. This article argues, however, that the most important problem underlying this case confusion is inherent in the widely utilized constitutional standard of strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny typically requires a compelling governmental interest, “narrow tailoring,” and some causal relation between the regulation and the compelling interest. The crucial point, though, is that, as this article documents, each of these elements lends itself to a surprising degree of arbitrariness, judicial subjectivity, uncontrollable complexity, and sheer impracticality. The article works through these multiple problems, in the context of electoral lies and much more broadly, and considers two significant possible reforms of standard versions of the judicial strict scrutiny test.
An Emotion-Based Approach to Freedom of Speech
Free speech law often protects emotional expression. However, we lack an understanding of the scope and limits of protection for emotional expression. This Essay seeks to make progress toward such an understanding because a better understanding and grasp of the nature of emotion itself is crucial to achieving this goal. If we can arrive at an improved understanding of emotions and how they can be expressed, we will be better able to explain when we do and do not constitutionally protect the expression of emotion.
Athenian Democracy at War
Classical Athens perfected direct democracy. The plays of this ancient Greek state are still staged today. These achievements are rightly revered. Less well known is the other side of this success story. Democratic Athens completely transformed warfare and became a superpower. The Athenian armed forces were unmatched in size and professionalism. This book explores the major reasons behind this military success. It shows how democracy helped the Athenians to be better soldiers. For the first time David M. Pritchard studies, together, all four branches of the armed forces. He focuses on the background of those who fought Athens' wars and on what they thought about doing so. His book reveals the common practices that Athens used right across the armed forces and shows how Athens' pro-war culture had a big impact on civilian life. The book puts the study of Athenian democracy at war on an entirely new footing.