CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

New Article Spotlight: The First Amendment as Criminal Procedure

Solove_05From George Washington University Law School CrimProf Daniel J. Solove recently published The First Amendment as Criminal Procedure.  Here is the abstract: 

This article explores the relationship between the First Amendment and criminal procedure. These two domains of constitutional law have long existed as separate worlds, rarely interacting with each other. But many instances of government information gathering can implicate First Amendment interests such as freedom of speech, association, and religion.

The Fourth and Fifth Amendments used to provide considerable protection for First Amendment interests, as in the famous 1886 case, Boyd v. United States, where the Supreme Court held that the government was prohibited from seizing a person's private papers. Over time, however, Fourth and Fifth Amendment protection shifted, and now countless searches and seizures involving people's private papers, the books they read, the websites they surf, the pen names they use when writing anonymously, and so on fall completely outside of the protection of constitutional criminal procedure.

Professor Solove argues that the First Amendment provides protection against government information gathering implicating First Amendment interests. He contends that there are doctrinal, historical, and normative justifications to develop what he calls “First Amendment criminal procedure.” Solove sets forth an approach to determine when certain instances of government information gathering fall within the regulatory domain of the First Amendment and what level of protection the First Amendment should provide.  [Mark Godsey]

Scholarship | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New Article Spotlight: The First Amendment as Criminal Procedure:


I understand the freedom of speech concerning the local newspapers. When they character assasin an idividual simply because they can varify what a liar stated,(by just asking the liar to repeat what he stated) couldn't this be abuse of the Constitution of the United States?
Is their any kind of protection or reprocussion the character assasinnated (victim) can do?

Posted by: andrewdennislopez | Aug 25, 2006 9:36:45 AM

Post a comment