| Type of Document |
Master's Thesis |
| Author |
Gaddy, James
|
| URN |
etd-04142004-104506 |
| Title |
"Don't Pooh-Pooh Our Poo Poo": Penalty, Subsidy, and Refusal to Fund in the Aftermath of National Endowment for the Arts V. Finley |
| Degree |
Master of Mass Communication (M.M.C.) |
| Department |
Mass Communication |
| Advisory Committee |
| Advisor Name |
Title |
| Emily Erickson |
Committee Chair |
| David Kurpius |
Committee Member |
| Kevin Mulcahy |
Committee Member |
|
| Keywords |
- finley
- government speech
- law
|
| Date of Defense |
2004-04-12 |
| Availability |
unrestricted |
Abstract
Legal scholars said the National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley decision would create a "chilling effect" in government subsidy programs, and it unlawfully expanded the government speech doctrine. By analyzing cases that subsequently use Finley for a substantive part of their rationale, this article argues the opposite: the courts have rejected the government's attempts to interpret the decision as one that allows viewpoint discrimination and have not allowed the government to further a broad reading of the decision. The article also argues that, under the government speech doctrine, Finley provides the controlling precedent for truly "hybrid speech" cases where the government and private voices are equally responsible for the speech that occurs. These cases involve "excellence criteria," in which private voices are selectively chosen by the government. In these cases, Finley should apply.
|
| Files |
| Filename |
Size |
Approximate Download Time
(Hours:Minutes:Seconds)
|
| 28.8 Modem |
56K Modem |
ISDN (64 Kb) |
ISDN (128 Kb) |
Higher-speed Access |
| |
Gaddy_thesis.pdf |
1.35 Mb |
00:06:14 |
00:03:12 |
00:02:48 |
00:01:24 |
00:00:07 |
|
