Penning Protesters:
Are Police-Imposed "Free Speech Zones" and Cages at Conventions Constitutional?
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses the ongoing issue of how to accommodate protesters' First Amendment rights with security concerns about terrorism and other acts of violence. Hilden contends that the First Amendment was violated when protesters were relegated to a fenced-in area at the Democratic National Convention. She also argues that generalized bag searches at the Republican National Convention (which a New York federal judge recently forbade) are far preferable to First Amendment violations like those that occurred at the DNC.
Tuesday, Aug. 03, 2004

The Scott Peterson Trial:
Can Prosecutors Win the Case? And If So, How?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the high-profile, ongoing trial of Scott Peterson -- accused of killing his wife, Laci, and unborn child. Hilden assesses the evidence in the case, with attention to specific items that may cut in favor of the prosecution or defense. She also considers whether, given weaknesses in the case, prosecutors can possibly win -- and suggests a scenario in which they might be able to.
Tuesday, Jul. 20, 2004

The Supreme Court's New Decision on Children and Internet Porn:
How Two Contrasting Views of the First Amendment Split the Court
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the Supreme Court's recent decision on COPA, the Child Online Protection Act. Hilden focuses on two interesting aspects of the decision. One is the odd split it caused on the Court, drawing a line separating liberal from liberal, and conservative from conservative. The other is the way each side of the Court's divide believed it was the one best vindicating the First Amendment.
Tuesday, Jul. 06, 2004

The Dismissed Juror in the Peterson Case:
Why He Should Have Been Kept on the Jury
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses a recent development in the high-profile California murder prosecution of Scott Peterson. Recently, the judge in the Peterson case decided to dismiss juror Justin Falconer, apparently on the ground that he had become a "distraction" due to media focus on a comment Falconer had made to a relative of the victim, Laci Peterson. Hilden argues that since the comment was found to have been relatively innocuous, the dismissal -- if it was based on media attention -- was an error.
Wednesday, Jun. 30, 2004

Did a Government Lawyer "Aid and Abet" Possible War Crimes By Writing a Crucial Memo?
The Controversy Surrounding Berkeley Law Professor John Yoo
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses the subject of the protest at the recent graduation at the University of California Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law. About a quarter of Boalt graduating students wore red armbands to protest a memo co-written by law professor John Yoo at a time when he was working for the Bush Administration as an attorney in the Office of Legal Counsel. The memo opines that the Geneva Conventions do not protect suspected Taliban or Al Qaeda members. Students have claimed that by writing the memo, Yoo aided and abetted possible abuse and even torture. Hilden evaluates their argument.
Tuesday, Jun. 08, 2004

Why You Can't Sue Google
The Reason Defamation Law Applies to News Sites, But Not News Search Sites, And What This May Mean For the Future
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses why the risk of defamation liability is so much greater in the real world, than on the Internet. Citing both a federal statute relevant to the issue, and traditional defamation doctrine, Hilden notes that search sites such as Google, in particular, are immune from defamation liability despite the fact that they widely disseminate information and news. She considers what the liability difference may mean for the future.
Tuesday, May. 25, 2004

Another Reason For Donald Rumsfeld to Resign:
Nondisclosure of Crucial Information Harms the First Amendment
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden argues that there is an important First Amendment-related dimension to the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. She argues that, in context, the military's decision not to disclose any specifics of the reported abuse, and its effort to delay press disclosure of the abuse, harmed First Amendment values by effectively making the kind of press investigation and public debate the Amendment seeks to foster, impossible.
Friday, May. 14, 2004

The Kobe Bryant Case:
The Court May Have Been Right to Withhold His Accuser's Psychiatric History, But The Law on This Issue Is Wrong
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a recent ruling in the Kobe Bryant criminal case. The trial judge ruled, after a closed hearing on the issue, that Bryant's defense cannot present certain evidence relating to his accuser's psychiatric history -- including, reportedly, evidence of two suicide attemptly shortly prior to the evening on which she says he raped her. Hilden explains why the judge's ruling was a correct interpretation of the law, but argues that the law relevant to this issue should be changed, to make accusers' psychiatric history admissible when their testimony is as crucial as it is here.
Tuesday, Apr. 27, 2004

The FCC Tries To Silence Howard Stern:
Can the Radio Shock Jock Sue?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the plight of radio shock jock Howard Stern from a legal perspective. Could Stern, who's losing airplay due to FCC pressure, bring a suit against the government based on the federal statute that allows suits to be brought for damages, based on violations of constitutional rights? Hilden explains why such a suit -- though worthy -- would be difficult under a number of current legal doctrines.
Tuesday, Apr. 13, 2004

The Dangers of Underestimating a Smart Jury:
Assessing The Defense In The Stewart Case, Part Two
In Part Two of a two-part series assessing the defense tactics in the Martha Stewart case, FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden argues that Stewart's attorney, Robert Morvillo, made mistakes in two respects in his summation, and that he also erred in allowing Stewart to have her celebrity friends visit the courtroom. Hilden also contends that all three mistakes boil down to underestimating the jury -- which turned out to be interested exclusively in the evidence, and not in celebrity glamor or Stewart's "home arts" career.
Friday, Mar. 19, 2004

Should Martha Stewart's Lawyer Have Strongly Advised Her to Testify?
Assessing the Defense in the Stewart Case, Part One
In the first of a two-part series of columns on the Martha Stewart defense, FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden examines Stewart's decision not to testify, and the considerations that may have caused Stewart and her attorney, Robert Morvillo, to choose this option. Hilden offers a list of pros and cons of Stewart's taking the stand, and argues that the decision that she wouldn't testify was a reasonable -- and probably corrrect -- one.
Monday, Mar. 15, 2004

When Crime Pays, Who Should Get the Money?
The Suit To Freeze Scott Peterson's Profits From the Sale of His Story
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a ruling ruling in a civil suit related to the trial of Scott Peterson for the murder of his wife, Laci, and their unborn child. In the civil suit, Laci's mother, Sharon Rocha asked the court to put any book or movie proceeds Scott might receive into a trust, so that they would not be spent, pending the criminal trial verdict. In a tentative ruling, the judge refused, but said he will accept additional briefing on the issue. Hilden argues the judge's tentative ruling was correct, and should be made final.
Tuesday, Mar. 02, 2004

How the Janet Jackson "Nipplegate" Scandal Illustrates the Dangers of Chilling Free Speech
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses the subsequent ramifications of the Janet Jackson/Justin Timberlake Super Bowl stunt from a First Amendment perspective. Hilden argues that evidence of a chilling effect on broadcasts ranging from MTV's video rotation, to the drama E.R., is cause for concern. She also offers ways in which FCC Commissioner Powell's stances on the incident have aggravated the chilling effect, and suggests what Powell could do now to lessen it.
Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2004

Does The Guarantee of a "Prompt" Judicial Decision Apply to Adult Business Zoning Cases?
The Supreme Court Will Decide This Term
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses an important First Amendment case in which the Supreme Court will hear oral argument this March. The case raises the issue of what procedures must, under the First Amendment, be afforded to those who are targeted by towns and cities under zoning laws that cover "adult" businesses. It also raises interesting issues as to how the Supreme Court ought to interpret its own precedents when the precedents represent a split among prior Justices.
Tuesday, Feb. 03, 2004

Barring Reporters From Jury Selection:
Why a Recent Ruling in the Martha Stewart Case Was In Error
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses a recent ruling in the Martha Stewart obstruction of justice/insider trading trial. Hilden contends that the judge overseeing Stewart's case was wrong to order that the courtroom be closed to the press and public during jury selection. Hilden argues that the judge's concerns -- that jurors' names might be revealed, and that they might be inhibited from giving full and frank answers -- can be addressed in other ways, and that the First Amendment press access right is too valuable to be sacrificed this way.
Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2004

Evidence of Prosecution Bias in the Kobe Bryant and Michael Jackson Cases
Why It's Troubling, and What Role It May Play at Trial
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden considers evidence of prosecutorial bias in two high-profile criminal cases. In the Kobe Bryant case, Hilden discusses evidence that staffers ordered, and a D.A. received and kept, T-shirts mocking Bryant's defense and depicting a hanged man, in the style of the game of Hangman. In the Jackson case, Hilden chronicles a number of what she argues are highly inappropriate comments by the D.A.. Hilden argues that, in each case, the jury ought to hear the evidence suggesting prosecutorial bias, since that evidence may undermine jurors' confidence as to whether exculpatory evidence has been properly given to the defense.
Friday, Jan. 02, 2004

Bono, Nicole Richie, and The F-Word
The Insanity of Broadcast Indecency Law
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden critiques a recent bill in Congress that would forbid the broadcast of eight "dirty words," no matter in what way they are used. Hilden parallels today's controversy over the bill with the controversy reflected in a twenty-five-year-old Supreme Court case involving a monologue by George Carlin. Carlin mentioned that there were seven words one could never say on the radio -- and then proceeded to say all seven on the radio.
Tuesday, Dec. 23, 2003

The Texas Supreme Court's Libel-By-Fiction Case
A Key First Amendment Controversy
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses an important First Amendment case on which the Texas Supreme Court recently heard oral argument. The case pits a Texas judge and prosecutor against the Dallas Observer, and, as Hilden explains, involves several interesting issues, including: Can a fictitious article be the basis for a libel suit and if so, when? And, is it the nature of parody and satire to sometimes mimic the original so closely, they are mistaken for it (or for a sequel)?
Tuesday, Dec. 09, 2003

The Supreme Court Considers Whether a Privacy Act Plaintiff Can Recover $1000 Even Without Proof of Damages
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a case to be argued before the Supreme Court on December 3. The case concerns the federal Privacy Act, which prohibits unauthorized disclosures of individuals' private information by the government, and allows individuals adversely affected by such disclosures to sue. The question the Court will resolve is how the damages provision of the Act applies when no actual damages are held to have been proven.
Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2003

Matt Drudge Versus "K Street"
Does the Internet Maverick Have a Claim Against the Boundary-Testing Show?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden considers whether Matt Drudge, of The Drudge Report, might be able to sue the television program "K Street" for using his name, the name of his website, and images of his website in one of its episodes. Hilden suggests that such a suit -- based on a copyright, trademark, or libel theory -- may be more viable than the lawyers for "K Street" seem to believe.
Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2003

Matt Drudge Versus "K Street"
Does the Internet Maverick Have a Claim against the Boundary-Testing Show?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden considers whether Matt Drudge, of The Drudge Report, might be able to sue the television program "K Street" for using his name, the name of his website, and images of his website in one of its episodes. Hilden suggests that such a suit -- based on a copyright, trademark, or libel theory -- may be more viable than the lawyers for "K Street" seem to believe.
Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2003

Breaking the Law to Help Enforce It?
The Student Who Put Boxcutters on Planes
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden argues for leniency in the case of Nathaniel Heatwole, the college student who is charged with putting box cutters and other materials in two Southwest Airlines planes, apparently in an effort to call attention to still-lax airline security. Hilden offers three reasons why Heatwole's sentence should be modest, and contends that Heatwole's type of lawbreaking may deserve at least some encouragement, as well as punishment.
Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2003

The Line Between State And Federal Criminal Jurisdiction
Two Recent Murder-for-Hire Decisions Illustrate How Blurry It Can Be
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden comments on two recent cases involving the question of when murder-for-hire can be a federal crime. Hilden uses the cases as a lens into the more general question of how our government decides when a crime can be federal -- and critiques the current broad reach of federal criminal statutes.
Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2003

Anonymity Versus Law Enforcement:
The Fight Over Subpoenaing Alleged Downloaders' Names From Internet Service Providers
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the Recording Industry Association of America's fight to enforce a subpoena for the identity of a user alleged to have illegally downloaded over 600 songs in a single day. As Hilden, explains, Internet Service Provider Verizon objected to the subpoena on the ground that it was not authorized by statute, and on the groun that it violated the First Amendment. Hilden critiques the district court's First Amendment ruling.
Wednesday, Oct. 01, 2003

Can the RIAA Truly Give Illegal Distributors "Amnesty"?
And If So, Should They Accept?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a controversial recent move by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The group has decided to sue 261 persons across the country whom it believes have allowed others, through the Internet, to access and illegally copy the music files on their computers. The RIAA has offered to settle for about $3,000 with those it has sued, and to grant "amnesty," on certain conditions, to those it might sue in the future. Are these deals attractive, from a legal and strategic point of view? Hilden discusses the considerations in opting for or against them.
Tuesday, Sep. 16, 2003

The California Supreme Court's Recent Decision On DeCSS, the DVD Encryption-Cracking Code:
Its Reasoning and Significance
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a recent, important decision by the California Supreme Court.  The decision upheld a preliminary injunction (that is, an injunction for the duration of the case) requiring certain websites to de-post the DeCSS code -- which allows the user to decrypt encrypted DVD movies.  The plaintiff alleges that posting the DeCSS code violates trade secret law; website owners argued unsuccessfully that the preliminary injunction violated the First Amendment.
Monday, Sep. 01, 2003

Expanding Discrimination Law To Protect Independent Contractors:
Why It's Crucial to Sex Equality
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a possible extension of discrimination law -- to cover not only employees, but also independent contractors.  In particular, Hilden considers whether sex discrimination law should be extended to protect freelance writers, in light of evidence that freelancers for The New Yorker and other publications are predominantly male.
Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2003

Do Americans Have a First Amendment Right to Become "Human Shields" and to Criticize Their Government?
The Case of Faith Fippinger
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses the Bush Administration's much-publicized recent decision to go after a sixty-two-year-old retired schoolteacher who went to Iraq as a "human shield" and has been vocal in her criticism of the recent Iraq war.  Hilden contends that the evidence suggests that the charges against Fippinger are motivated by her speech, not her actions, and thus that she should challenge them as violations of the First Amendment.
Thursday, Aug. 14, 2003

Does A Photographer's Attempt to Sell Cameron Diaz's Topless Photos Back to Her Constitute Extortion?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses an unusal area of criminal law: the law of extortion, which reaches some instances in which a threat is made to disclose information unless money is paid.  Hilden considers, specifically, whether California extortion law covers the actions of a photographer who tried to convince Cameron Diaz to buy topless photos he'd taken of her, so that they would not be sold to another buyer.
Tuesday, Jul. 22, 2003

A Recent Supreme Court Decision Allowing the Government to Force Public Libraries to Filter Users'  Internet Access Is Less Significant Than It Might At First Appear
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden argues the recent Supreme Court decision in American Library Ass'n is less destructive to free speech rights than it seems.  She points out that, there, the Court relied heavily on users' option to ask libraries to promptly remove the filters that block them from accessing certain websites -- and that Justice Kennedy's concurrence even invites users to sue if compliance is not prompt.
Tuesday, Jul. 01, 2003

Fear Factor:
Is Art That Can Be Mistaken For Terrorism Protected by the First Amendment?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses an unusual instance of crime and punishment in New York City, and its First Amendment implications.  Artist Clinton Boisvert placed dozens of black boxes marked "Fear" in a subway station without permission; the bomb squad was called; and Boisvert was charged with two crimes.  Should he have been? Hilden discusses the issues his case raises.
Monday, Jun. 23, 2003

Spike Lee v. Spike TV:
Testing the Limits of Trademark And "Right Of Publicity" Claims
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses Spike Lee's recently-filed New York state court suit against Viacom, MTV, and the President of the newly-christened "Spike TV."** Lee argues that the defendants -- who admitted that they chose the name "Spike TV" to connote the image of Lee, among others -- violated his trademark, as well as his right of publicity.* Hilden contends that the suit has more merit than those who've mocked it as megalomania might think.
Monday, Jun. 09, 2003

Murder and "The Matrix":
Has The Movie Caused Violence and If So, What Should We Do About It?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden addresses the trend in which the movie "The Matrix" has been invoked in a surprising number of criminal cases in recent years.* The case range from the Beltway Sniper case, to the Columbine High School shootings, to several less high-profile cases in which insanity pleas have been accepted based on delusions relating to "The Matrix."* Hilden discusses such questions as: Why is the philosophy of "The Matrix" so powerful?* Is it original and unique?* And are the moviemakers in any way culpable for these crimes?
Monday, Jun. 02, 2003

To Make His Defense, Should Zacarias Moussaoui Have Access To Alleged Al Qaeda Members Detained by the Government?
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses the difficult decision that the judge in the Zacarias Moussaoui case must make, after closed-door hearings conducted last week:* Will Moussaoui, who is representing himself with the aid of standby counsel, be allowed to interview an Al Qaeda prisoner whom he says could aid in his defense, despite the risk to national security?* Hilden describes the legal backdrop, and comments on how the judge's predicament might be resolved.
Monday, May. 12, 2003

The Supreme Court Considers the Boundaries of Anti-Trespassing Laws:
If They are Too Broad, Do They Violate the First Amendment?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a Supreme Court case to be argued on Wednesday, April 30, Virginia v. Hicks. The case is a First Amendment challenge to a Virginia public housing authority's policy of requiring approval from a housing manager before nonresidents may visit the housing project. Because the plaintiff did not seek to exercise his First Amendment rights, but rather to visit his son, the Court must consider whether he may challenge the policy, which was applied to exclude him from the project.
Monday, Apr. 28, 2003

When Nike Speaks, Is It Always "Commercial Speech"?
The Supreme Court Will Soon Be Asked To Decide
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses a case on which the Supreme Court will hear argument April 23. The case concerns the dividing line between "commercial speech" (comparatively easy to regulate) and "political speech" (difficult to regulate due to strong First Amendment protections). The specific statements at issue were made by Nike, and concern treatment of foreign workers.
Tuesday, Apr. 15, 2003

Can the Means by Which War Is Covered Be Changed to Be Less Biased?
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden discusses the controversial topic of reportage on the Iraq war and its bias. She considers questions such as: Is "embedded" journalists' coverage inherently skewed? What is the influence of wartime blogs? What alternative methods of coverage are not now being employed, but might be? Has there been sufficient coverage of the anti-war movement?
Tuesday, Apr. 01, 2003

The United States and the War on Iraq:
Not So Much an Outlaw State, As a State Responding to Outmoded Law
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden contends that the fault for the war on Iraq does not lie only at the door of the U.S. and Britain, but also at the door of the U.N., Al Qaeda, and Iraq itself. Hilden contends that, in the modern age of international terrorism, the U.N. Charter's definition of self-defense is no longer viable, and must be revised.
Saturday, Mar. 22, 2003

A Unanimous Supreme Court Decision Means Whistleblowers Can Go After Counties, Not Just Companies
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a recent Supreme Court decision that will make it easier for whistleblowers not only to expose illegality, but to be handsomely rewarded for doing so. The decision allows not only companies, but counties, who are claimed to have cheated the government out of money, to be sued by whistleblowers under the False Claims Act.
Tuesday, Mar. 18, 2003

Should Universities Crack Down on File Swapping?
Why They Should Resist Congress's Call And Fight for Students' Free Speech Rights
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses federal legislators' recent requests that universities crack down on students' illegal file swapping. Hilden argues that the two main methods by which schools are likely to crack down would severely impede free speech and education. She also contends that as students' guardians, universities should be protecting them, not helping to prosecute them.
Tuesday, Mar. 04, 2003

If the Supreme Court Holds That Public Libraries Cannot Be Required to Use Software Filters, Are There Other Ways to Protect Children on the Web?
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden previews some of the issues likely to be raised in an upcoming March 5 Supreme Court argument.* On that day, the Court will consider whether the federal Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA) violates the First Amendment.* CIPA says that public libraries will lose their federal funding if they fail to install software filters, designed to target obscenity and child pornography, on their publicly accessible Internet terminals.
Tuesday, Feb. 18, 2003

"Putin Has Come To Sue You, Dobby":
Does The Russian President Have A Case Against the Obsequious Harry Potter House-Elf?
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden comments on reports that a major Russian law firm is preparing to sue the creators of the film version of Harry Potter's Dobby character, on the ground that the character too closely resembles Russian President Vladimir Putin. Do the Russians have a basis to sue? Hilden discusses why, surprisingly, they actually might.
Tuesday, Feb. 04, 2003

THE ACLU ON SURVEILLANCE:
DESPITE ITS OVERARCHING ASSESSMENT OF HOW MONITORING HARMS PRIVACY, A NEW REPORT FAILS TO OFFER CONSTRUCTIVE SOLUTIONS
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the report the ACLU issued this month entitled "Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains: The Growth of an American Surveillance Society." Hilden praises the report's synthesis of legal and technological developments relating to privacy, security, and monitoring. However, she takes issues with its conclusions and recommendations.
Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2003

THE OVER-HYPING OF HUMAN CLONING:
WHY THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES IT POSES ARE LIKELY TO BE RELATIVELY LIMITED
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the legal and ethical issues human cloning may raise, in the wake of last week's claim that the first cloned human has already been born. Hilden argues that the societal influence of cloning will be modest, and that the influence of a somewhat similar development -- genetic screening -- will be far greater.
Monday, Dec. 30, 2002

WHY OUTGOING CONGRESSMAN GARY CONDIT IS VERY UNWISE TO SUE AUTHOR DOMINICK DUNNE FOR LIBEL
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden analyzes the obstacles Gary Condit may face in pursuing his recently-filed libel case against author Dominick Dunne. Hilden contends that even assuming Condit is correct that Dunne falsely insinuated that Condit was connected with Chandra Levy's murder, Condit still, in all likelihood, has only a weak case against Dunne.
Tuesday, Dec. 24, 2002

SHOULD LINKING BE IMMUNE FROM LAWSUITS?
THE CASE IN FAVOR OF A FEDERAL STATUTORY IMMUNITY FOR LINKERS
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden explains the legal risks that currently come along with a website's decision to link to particular material on another site. Hilden also proposes a broad Congressional immunity for linking, to eliminate these risks.
Tuesday, Dec. 10, 2002

WHEN SELF-CENSORSHIP IS WORSE THAN CENSORSHIP BY THE GOVERNMENT:
HEALTH GROUPS TRY TO CONTROL HOW MOVIES CAN DEPICT SMOKING
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden assesses the free speech impact of three new proposals relating to movies and smoking, recently put forward by health groups. Most prominent among the proposals is this one: If a movie includes smoking without sending an anti-smoking message, it gets an "R" rating.
Tuesday, Nov. 26, 2002

THE SUPREME COURT CONFRONTS CROSS-BURNING AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT ONCE AGAIN, BECAUSE IT FAILED TO MAKE THIS KNOTTY AREA OF LAW CLEAR THE FIRST TIME
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden explores a difficult question the Supreme Court has so far avoided: Can a state or city prohibit cross-burning without violating the First Amendment? As Hilden discusses, ten years ago, the Supreme Court rejected St. Paul's anti-cross-burning statute, and in a case soon to be argued, it may well reject Virginia's, as well.
Friday, Nov. 15, 2002

A "COMPLETE INFORMATION BLACKOUT," PART TWO:
DISAGREEMENT BY COURTS ON THE CLOSURE OF IMMIGRATION HEARINGS MAKES SUPREME COURT REVIEW LIKELY
In Part Two of a two-part series, FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses two recent, contradictory federal appeals court opinions on this question: Can the government, through a blanket closure order, deny media and public access to all 9/11-related deportation hearings? Hilden explains the relevant Supreme Court-mandated First Amendment test, and how each court applied it.
Tuesday, Oct. 29, 2002

A "COMPLETE INFORMATION BLACKOUT," PART ONE:
A FEDERAL COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DENIES MEDIA ACCESS TO ALL IMMIGRATION PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO 9/11 WITNESSES
In Part One of a two-part series, FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses the recent, historic decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to uphold a government directive broadly denying access to immigration proceedings. The proceedings concern aliens who the government believes had a connection to, or knowledge of, the 9/11 attacks. Hilden argues that the decision was far more a creature of improper judicial policymaking than of law.
Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2002

AN INTERVIEW WITH INTERNET LAW EXPERT LAUREN GELMAN
In this Q&A;, FindLaw columnist Julie Hilden asked ten written questions to attorney Lauren Gelman, who is the Assistant Director of the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. In her detailed responses, Gelman explains the issues in the Supreme Court case of Eldred v. Ashcroft, which concerns copyright extension legislation, and will be argued today, October 9. Gelman also discusses a creative form of protest against copyright extension: a Bookmobile -- offering free, public domain e-book Books such as Alice in Wonderland to children -- whose travels around the country will culminate at the Court's doorstep.
Wednesday, Oct. 09, 2002

RETHINKING THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT:
WHY THE GOVERNMENT IS AFRAID TO ADMIT THAT AMERICAN CITIZEN JOSE PADILLA HAS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, AND HOW ITS DILEMMA CAN BE SOLVED
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden offers a novel solution to the controversy over the government's refusal to recognize the rights of Jose Padilla -- an American citizen who was arrested in America, on suspicion that he conspired with Al Qaeda members to plant a "dirty bomb" here. Is there some way that the government can respect Padilla's rights as a citizen without, as a result, losing the ability to force him to provide crucial information? Hilden suggests the answer is yes.
Tuesday, Oct. 01, 2002

SHOULD POSSIBLE ANTHRAX SUSPECT STEVEN HATFILL, WHO MAINTAINS HIS INNOCENCE, USE LIBEL SUITS TO GET MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CLAIMS AGAINST HIM?
FindLaw columnist, attorney and author Julie Hilden offers a new strategy for Mark Hatfill, the government scientist who lost his research job after the Justice Department named him as a "person of interest" in the anthrax letters investigation. So far Hatfill's attorney has asked for an apology, and asked for the government's help in finding Hatfill a new job. Hilden suggests, however, that a more effective strategy might be for Hatfill to start filing a series of libel suits, which could help him find out the substance of the claims against him and, if he is innocent, rebut them.
Monday, Sep. 16, 2002

NINE MUST-READ LEGAL BOOKS AND ONE ESSENTIAL LEGAL BLOG
FindLaw book reviewer, attorney and author Julie Hilden recommends and describes nine books on or related to the law, as well as a particularly interesting legal blog. Hilden eschews classics like Democracy and Distrust in favor of some less-noted but valuable works, and some she believes are more contemporary, or more visionary.
Friday, Sep. 13, 2002

THE "CLEAN FLICKS" CASE:
IS IT ILLEGAL TO RENT OUT A COPYRIGHTED VIDEO AFTER EDITING IT TO OMIT "OBJECTIONABLE" CONTENT?
FindLaw columnist, attorney, and author Julie Hilden discusses a recent lawsuit against some of the country's most well-known directors -- from Steven Spielberg to Steven Soderbergh. The plaintiff is a small video rental chain called Clean Flicks, which is seeking a declaration that its editing movies for sex, violence, and "bad" language before it rents them out is legal. Hilden assesses the arguments for both sides -- including the argument that Clean Flicks's editing falls within the "fair use" exception to the copyright laws.
Tuesday, Sep. 03, 2002

Message Boards