The Supreme Court has unanimously held that Jackson Pollock’s paintings, Arnold Schöenberg’s music, and Lewis Carroll’s poem “Jabberwocky” are “unquestionably shielded” by the First Amendment. Nonrepresentational art, instrumental music, and nonsense: all receive constitutional coverage under an amendment protecting “the freedom of speech,” even though none involves what we typically think of as speech—the use of words to convey meaning. As a legal matter, the Court’s conclusion is clearly correct, but its premises are murky, and they raise difficult questions about the possibilities and limitations of law and expression. Nonrepresentational art, instrumental music, and nonsense do not employ language in any traditional sense, and sometimes do not even involve the transmission of articulable ideas. How, then, can they be treated as “speech” for constitutional purposes? What does the difficulty of that question suggest for First Amendment law and theory? And can law resolve such inquiries without relying on aesthetics, ethics, and philosophy? Comprehensive and compelling, this book represents a sustained effort to account, constitutionally, for these modes of “speech.” While it is firmly centered in debates about First Amendment issues, it addresses them in a novel way, using subject matter that is uniquely well suited to the task, and whose constitutional salience has been under-explored. Drawing on existing legal doctrine, aesthetics, and analytical philosophy, three celebrated law scholars show us how and why speech beyond words should be fundamental to our understanding of the First Amendment.

As unrest over officer-involved shootings and deaths in custody takes center stage in conversations about policing and the criminal justice system, Guidelines for Investigating Officer-Involved Shootings, Arrest-Related Deaths, and Deaths in Custody addresses critical investigation components from an expert witness perspective, providing the insights necessary to ensure a complete investigation. Investigating a custodial death or an officer involved in a shooting presents unique and complex issues: estate, community, judicial, agency, involved officer, and public policy interests are all at stake. These types of deaths present various emerging medical, psychological, legal and liability, technical, and investigatory issues that must be addressed through a comprehensive investigation. This book is ideal for students in criminal investigation, death investigation, crime scene investigation, and special topic courses in custodial deaths and officer-involved shootings, as well as for death investigators, law enforcement officers, police administrators, and attorneys.

Managing public employment cases in today's volatile, fast changing legal arena is no easy task. Just keeping up with the complex developments in constitutional, labor, civil service, administrative, and common law can be a full-time job. Aspen Publishers' Public Employee Discharge and Discipline is the definitive work on every aspect of public employment law. This invaluable two-volume resource is the only one of its kind to deal with all public employment disciplinary and discharge issues for federal, state and municipal employees. The Third Edition offers thorough analysis and in-depth discussion of such essential topics as: First Amendment and whistleblowing Public sector collective bargaining and arbitration Due process in discipline and discharge Administrative and judicial review Title VII, ADA, FMLA, and other discrimination laws Sexual harassment under 1983, Title IX, and Title VII Drug testing Invasion of privacy Applicability of common law tort and contract principles of wrongful discharge Summaries of federal and state cases Also, with Public Employee Discharge and Discipline, you will also get a BONUS CD-ROM containing over 30 easy-access, customizable forms as well as current surveys of state and federal cases! Public Employee Discharge and Discipline has been updated with the latest developments, including: Latest developments in the movement to limit or abrogate public employment collective bargaining Gross v. FBL Financial Services, a Supreme Court decision requiring an employee to prove that age discrimination was andquot;the soleandquot; and andquot;but forandquot; cause of discharge under the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. and§ 623(a) Adoption of Gross andquot;Sole Motiveandquot; Standard by Seventh Circuit in Fairley v. Andrews and Serwatka v. Rockwell Analysis of Thompson v. N.A. Stainless L.P., a 2011 unanimous Supreme Court decision that retaliation against a fiancandée for an employee's Title VII claim was actionable Discussion of Staub v. Proctor, another 2011 unanimous Supreme Court decision that a supervisor's bias may be andquot;a motivating factorandquot; for, and a proximate cause of, a discriminatory discharge, if it played some role in contributing to it, whether or not a non-biased decisionmaker conducted an independent investigation Evidentiary issues in discrimination litigation, including Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, a Supreme Court holding that andquot;me tooandquot; evidence of age discrimination - comments against other employees by other supervisors - may be admissible if relevant to the culture of the employer and Reid v. Google, Inc., a California Supreme Court decision that non-decisionmaker co-workers' andquot;stray remarksandquot; were relevant to an age discrimination claim Discussion of 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, a Supreme Court decision that a CBA providing arbitration as the sole remedy for ADEA claims and noting that Gilmer andquot;fully applies in the collective bargaining contextandquot; City of Ontario v. Quon, wherein the Supreme Court upheld monitoring of employer issued text-messaging devices to determine whether costs to the police department were being unduly inflated by personal calls as a andquot;reasonableandquot; search under the Fourth Amendment In re Golinski, a Ninth Circuit decision that denial of health benefits to married homosexual federal employee under the Health Benefits Act, 5 U.S.C. and§ 8903(1) because of a purported ban under the Defense of Marriage Act, 1 U.S.C. and§ 7, was impermissible under principles of statutory interpretation and other decisions that DOMA violated Equal Protection Continuing a

The First Amendment declares that 'Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. . . . ' Yet, in the following two hundred years, Congress and the states have sought repeatedly to curb these freedoms. The Supreme Court of the United States in turn gradually expanded First Amendment protection for freedom of expression but also defined certain categories of expression_obscenity, defamation, commercial speech , and 'fighting words' or disruptive expression-as constitutionally unprotected. From the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798 to the most recent cases to come before the Supreme Court, noted legal scholar David M. O'Brien provides the first comprehensive examination of these exceptions to the absolute command of the First Amendment, providing a history of each category of unprotected speech and putting into bold relief the larger questions of what kinds of expression should (and should not) receive First Amendment protection. O'Brien provides readers interested in civil liberties, constitutional history and law, and the U. S. Supreme Court a treasure trove of information and ideas about how to think about the First Amendment.