In A Right to Lie?, legal scholar Catherine J. Ross addresses the urgent issue of whether the nation's highest officers, including the president, have a right to lie under the Speech Clause, no matter what damage their falsehoods cause. Does freedom of expression protect even factual falsehoods? If so, are lies by candidates and public officials protected? And is there a constitutional path, without violating the First Amendment, to stop a president whose persistent lies endanger our lives and our democracy? Perhaps counter-intuitively, the general answer to each question is "yes." Drawing from dramatic court cases about defamers, proponents of birtherism, braggarts, and office holders, Ross reveals the almost insurmountable constitutional and practical obstacles to legal efforts to rein in public deception. She explains the rules that govern the treatment of lies, while also demonstrating the incalculable damage presidential mendacity may lead to, as revealed in President Trump's lies about the COVID-19 pandemic and the legitimacy of the 2020 election. Falsehoods have been at issue in every presidential impeachment proceeding from Nixon to Trump. But, until now, no one has analyzed why public lies might be impeachable offenses, and whether the First Amendment would provide a defense. Noting that speech by public employees does not receive the same First Amendment protection as the speech of ordinary citizens, Ross proposes the constitutionally viable solution of treating presidents as public employees who work for the people. Charged with oversight of the Executive, Congress may—and should—put future presidents on notice that material lies to the public on substantial matters will be deemed a "high crime and misdemeanor" subject to censure and even impeachment. A Right to Lie? explains how this approach could work if the political will were in place.
Presents an analysis of the lying behavior of political leaders, discussing the reasons why it occurs, the different types of lies, and the costs and benefits to the public and other countries that result from it, with examples from the ...
He focuses on "white" lies—those lies we tell for the purpose of sparing people discomfort—for these are the lies that most often tempt us.
Murphy, 872 F.2d 757, 761 (6th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1091 (1990). 21. Henerey v. St. Charles, 200 F.3d 1128, 1136–1137 (Wolle, J., dissenting); Carey v. Population Servs. Int'l., 431 U.S. 678 (1977); Henerey, ...
Anti-Semitism was a problem and as Nazi soldiers came often, violence increased. Soldiers came looking for Jewish works so at age thirteen, David made a decision to go with them. "They told me if I came to work, my family would be spared.
Bob Woodward, Shadow: Five Presidents and the Legacy of Watergate (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999), 27, 33, 38. 2. ... Christopher J. Lamb, The Mayaguez Crisis, Mission Command, and Civil-Military Relations (Washington, ...
Beginning with the moral questions raised about lying since antiquity, Sissela Bok takes up the justifications offered for all kinds of lies--white lies, lies to the sick and dying, lies of parents to children, lies to enemies, lies to ...
So, what happens when we do notice? Judi Ketteler thought of herself as an honest person. And yet, she knew it wasn’t the whole story . . . How often was Judi engaging in the same dishonest behavior she was condemning in others?
All over the world, people are circulating damaging lies, and these falsehoods are amplified as never before through powerful social media platforms that reach billions. Liars are saying that COVID-19 is a hoax.
This is the most comprehensive and up-to-date investigation of moral and conceptual questions about lying and deception.
In his Senate race , Cochran had one great advantage : Charles Evers , the brother of the assassinated civil rights leader Medgar Evers , was running as an independent . Not surprisingly , he was drawing a significant portion of the ...