Circumventing the “true threat” and “viewpoint” protection tests to deal with persistent campus hate speech

Bibliography

• Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616. 1919.
   Google Scholar
• Aguilar v. Avis Rent a Car Systems, 980 P. 2d 847, 87 Cal. Rptr. 132.
   Google Scholar
• Aguilar v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, 529 U.S. 1138. 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Bonnell v. Lorenzo, 81 F. Supp. 2d, 777. 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U. S. 446. 1969.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. “Averting Your Eyes in the Information Age: Online Hate Speech and the Captive Audience.” Charleston Law Review 12 (2017): 1–54.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A. “Retheorizing Actionable Injuries in Civil Lawsuits Involving Targeted Hate Speech: Hate Speech as Degradation and Humiliation.” Alabama Civil Rights & Liberties Law Review 9 (2018): 1–56.
   Google Scholar
• Browne, K. E. “Title VII as Censorship: Hostile-Environment Harassment and the First Amendment.” Ohio State Law Journal 52 (1991): 481–499.
   Google Scholar
• Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U. S. 742.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. Excitable Speech: A Politics of Performative . New York: Routledge, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, P. J. “Racial Insults and Free Speech within the University.” Georgetown Law Journal 79 (1991): 425–430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296. 1940.
   Google Scholar
• Chaplinski v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568. 1942.
   Google Scholar
• Chemerinsky, I. “Unpleasant Speech on Campus, Even Hate Speech, Is a First Amendment Issue.” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal 17 (2009): 2–10.
   Google Scholar
• Christine Franklin v. Gwinnett County Schools, 503 U.S. 60. 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Chuang, R. , V. Krishna , and T. D. Daniels . “Gender and Ethnicity Influences on Student Attitudes toward Speech Restrictions, Political Correctness, and Education Models.” Free Speech Yearbook 33 (1995): 99–115. doi:10.1080/08997225.1995.10556185.
   Google Scholar
• Code of Federal Regulations, Vol. 29, Section. 1604.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15. 1971.
   Google Scholar
• Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629. 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Dee, J. “Sweet Baby Jesus, the Band Who Must Not Be Named, and Friends U Can’t Trust: Disparaging, Immoral and Scandalous Trademarks in the United States and the European Union.” First Amendment Studies 53 (2019): 91–127. doi:10.1080/21689725.2019.1601578.
   Google Scholar
• Delgado, R. “Campus Anti-Racism Rules: Constitutional Narratives in Collusion.” Northwestern University Law Review 85 (1991): 375–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Education . Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance: Title IX . Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. “Academic Freedom.” Educational Review 1 (1902 January): 3.
   Google Scholar
• Doe v. University of Michigan, 721 F.Supp. 863. (E.D. Mich. 1989).
   Google Scholar
• Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775. 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Fisk, C. , and E. Chemerinsky . “Civil Rights without Remedies: Vicarious Liability under Title VII, Section 1983, and Title IX.” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal 7 (1999): 775–800.
   Google Scholar
• Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U. S. 474. 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Gander, E. “Justice Scalia and the RAV Mystery: A Discussion of Hate Speech, Critical Race Theory, and the First Amendment.” Free Speech Yearbook 43 (2006): 134–153. doi:10.1080/08997225.2006.10556334.
   Google Scholar
• Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 524 U.S. 274. 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Gerard, J. B. “The First Amendment in A Hostile Environment: A Primer on Free Speech and Sexual Harassment.” Notre Dame Law Review 68 (1993): 1003–1021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill, A. “Revising Campus Speech Codes.” Free Speech Yearbook 31 (1993): 124–137. doi:10.1080/08997225.1993.10556157.
   Google Scholar
• Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652. 1925.
   Google Scholar
• Glenn, R. A. , and O. H. Stephens . “Campus Hate Speech and Equal Protection: Competing Constitutional Values.” Widener Journal of Public Law 6 (1997): 349–363.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. , and A. Durant , eds. Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon . Cambridges: Cambridge U. Press, 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479. 1965.
   Google Scholar
• Haiman, F. Speech Acts and the First Amendment . Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois U. Press, 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Haiman, F. “On Being Politically Correct in a Free Society.” Free Speech Yearbook 32 (1994): 1–3. doi:10.1080/08997225.1994.10556164.
   Google Scholar
• Haiman, F. “Hate Crimes.” Free Speech Yearbook 37 (1998): 161–162.
   Google Scholar
• Hanson, J. “Ross Richenderfer and Matt Schissler. “The Fighting Words Doctrine: A History of Balancing Order and Liberty.”.” Free Speech Yearbook 44 (2009): 119–138. doi:10.1080/08997225.2009.10556351.
   Google Scholar
• Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169. 1972.
   Google Scholar
• Herbert, A. “Can We Still Talk Things Out?: A Case Study of Campus Hate Speech Regulations at the University of Texas.” Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal 33 (2017): 117–139.
   Google Scholar
• Hess v. Indiana, 414 U.S. 105. 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703. 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Hook, S. “Communists, McCarthy and American Universities.” Minerva 33 (1987): 344.
   Google Scholar
• Hulshizer, J. “Securing Freedom from Harassment without Reducing Freedom of Speech: Doe V. University of Michigan.” Iowa Law Review 76 (1991): 392–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bi-Sexual Group, 515 U.S. 557. 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Iancu v. Brunetti, 588 U.S. 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason U., 923 F. 2d. 388. 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, J. B. , and K. Potter . Hate Crimes . New York: Oxford U. Press, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Ladenson, R. “Is Academic Freedom Necessary?” Law and Philosophy 5 (1986): 59–87. doi:10.1007/BF00143012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matal v. Tam, 582 U.S. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Mathews, D. “A Symposium on Freedom and Ideology: The Debate about Political Correctness.” Civic Arts Review 23 (1992): 4.
   Google Scholar
• McGaffey, R. “Freedom of Speech for Ideas We Hate: Nongovernmental Abridgment of Freedom of Expression.” Free Speech Yearbook 26 (1987): 90–103. doi:10.1080/08997225.1987.10556079.
   Google Scholar
• Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57. 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Miami Herald v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 214. 1974.
   Google Scholar
• Nadine, S. “Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: Accommodating Free Speech and Gender Equality Values.” Free Speech Yearbook 31 (1993): 1–15. doi:10.1080/08997225.1993.10556151.
   Google Scholar
• Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697. 1931.
   Google Scholar
• Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 538. 1976.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neil, R. M. “An Inquiry into the Legal and Ethical Problems of Campus Hate Speech.” Free Speech Yearbook 29 (1991): 26–30. doi:10.1080/08997225.1991.10556129.
   Google Scholar
• Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438. 1928.
   Google Scholar
• Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, 523 U.S. 75. 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319. 1937.
   Google Scholar
• Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92. 1972.
   Google Scholar
• R. A. V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377. 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Resident Advisory Board v. Rizzo, 503 F. Supp. 383 (E.D. Pa. 1976).
   Google Scholar
• Resident Advisory Board v. Rizzo, 564 F. 2d 126. (3d Cir. 1977).
   Google Scholar
• Richards, I. A. Philosophy of Rhetoric . New York: Oxford U. Press, 1965.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez v. Maricopa County Community College District 605 F. 3d 703. 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Royce, J. “The Freedom of Teaching.” The Overland Monthly 2 (1883): 235–240.
   Google Scholar
• Schenk v. United States, 249 U.S. 41. 1919.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, C. R. “ Snyder V. Phelps: The Problem of Context.” Free Speech Yearbook 46 (2012): 3–9. doi:10.1080/08997225.2012.10556378.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, F. L. M. , and C. R. Coel . “Workplace Bullying Policies, Higher Education and the First Amendment: Building Bridges Not Walls.” First Amendment Studies 52 (2018): 96–111. doi:10.1080/21689725.2018.1495094.
   Google Scholar
• Smolla, R. A. “Academic Freedom, Hate Speech, and the Idea of a University.” Law and Contemporary Problems 53 (1990): 211–216. doi:10.2307/1191797.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443. 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Teresa Harris v. Forklift Systems, 510 U.S. 17, 21. 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1. 1949.
   Google Scholar
• Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397. 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503. 1969.
   Google Scholar
• Title VII, 29 U.S.C. sec. 633a.
   Google Scholar
• Tuman, J. S. “’Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, but Words Will Never Hurt Me’: The Fighting Words Doctrine on Campus.” Free Speech Yearbook 30 (1992): 114–128. doi:10.1080/08997225.1992.10556144.
   Google Scholar
• U. S. v. Kelner, 534 F. 2d 1020. 1976.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. v. Baker, No. 95-80106. (E.D. Mich. 1995).
   Google Scholar
• Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343. 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, S. Hate Speech: The History of American Controversy . Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Weberman, M. “University Hate Speech Policies and the Captive Audience Doctrine.” Ohio Northern University Law Review 36 (2010): 553–589.
   Google Scholar
• Whitney v. California 274 U.S. 357. 1927.
   Google Scholar
• Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357. 1927.
   Google Scholar
• Willborn, S. L. “Taking Discrimination Seriously: Oncale and the Fate of Exceptionalism in Sexual Harassment Law.” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal 77 (1999): 677–721.
   Google Scholar