Second Class Speech: The Court's Refinement of Content Regulation: Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61 (1981)

Authors

David M. Scanga, University of Nebraska College of LawFollow

Abstract

This Note examines the United States Supreme Court's prior decisions regarding the doctrine of content regulation and the insights into that doctrine provided by Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim. This analysis reveals the difficulty in developing a workable first amendment model for permissible content regulation. While the relationship of first amendment rights to local zoning power is beyond the scope of this Note, an understanding of the Court's theoretical first amendment framework can be particularly relevant to zoning in view of the posture of the Schad and Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. cases, which both involved constitutional attacks on city zoning ordinances.

I. Introduction

II. Content Regulation in Perspective

III. Analysis … A. The Schad Decision … B. Why Protect the Speech? … C. What Level of Protection for the Speech? … D. Distinguishing Young … 1. Burden on First Amendment Rights … 2. Supporting Evidence

IV. Schad’s Contribution to the Doctrine of Content Regulation

V. Conclusion

Recommended Citation

David M. Scanga, Second Class Speech: The Court's Refinement of Content Regulation: Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim, 452 U.S. 61 (1981), 61 Neb. L. Rev. (1982)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol61/iss2/5