Downloading Porn

[Mark Graber]

ANSWERS IN CAPS

>>> "Lichtman, Steven" <SBLichtman at ship.edu> 4/7/2009 11:30 AM >>>
A couple of questions/issues ...

(1) According to today's Washington Post, there was a "partial showing"
of the film, but the Post is unclear if the partial showing included XXX
material, or showed only scenes that did not rise to that level (kind of
like reading Playboy for the articles) ... Mark, can you clarify if they
showed anything that, erm, Potter Stewart would have known if he had
seen it?

ALAS, I LEFT AFTER THE PANEL DISCUSSION.  

(2) Given the Supreme Court's "he who pays the piper gets to call the
tune" jurisprudence (Rust, Finley, e.g.), under what theory would even a
retaliatory denial of funding be objectionable to this Court?

BUT SEE ALSO ROSENBERGER.  IF THE STATE CREATES A FREE SPEECH FORUM,
I.E., A UNIVERSITY, THEY MAY NOT BE AS FREE TO ATTACH CONDITIONS.

(3) Is it really academic freedom if the original showing of the film
was entirely student-driven?  My understanding is that there was no
faculty connection to this until the legislator made its move,
transforming this from "extracurricular event" to "cause célèbre."  Does
that matter?

PRESUMABLY STUDENTS ENJOY A DEGREE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM AS WELL. 
WHETHER THIS EXTENDS TO MOVIES IN THE STUDENT CENTER IS A FAIR QUESTION

Cheers,
Steven Lichtman

____________________
 
Dr. Steven B. Lichtman
Department of Political Science - 413 Grove Hall
Shippensburg University
1871 Old Main Drive
Shippensburg, PA  17257-2299
(717) 477-1845
http://webspace.ship.edu/SBLichtman/lichtman.htm 



-----Original Message-----
From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Graber
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 11:06 AM
To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu 
Subject: Downloading Porn

Here's a good constitutional law outside of courts question that I
faced yesterday.

At 9:00 AM, I was asked to participate in a panel discussion later that
day on the University's decision to cancel a showing of "Pirates II" in
response to pending legislation cutting off all funding to the
university if we showed porn films.

Two sets of issues.  First, there are the obvious constitutional
issues.  is the film pornographic under relevant definitions, does the
president have the right to cancel under Kuhlmeier, is the funding
cutoff constitutional, is there an overbroad issue here, and what about
academic freedom.

Second, some personal issues.  I did not have the time to go home. 
Having never heard of the film (at first I thought we were talking J.
Depp), I went on line and discovered that I could download some scenes. 
Should I have done so?  Did I have academic reason to do so, or could I
have answered all of the above questions without knowing much about the
film.  Should I have contacted my dean a) as a friend or b) to get
permission.

I came to the conclusion that there was no need to see the actual film.
 Curious what others think.

MAG

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu 
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof 

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
or wrongly) forward the messages to others.

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu 
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof 

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
or wrongly) forward the messages to others.