このエントリーをはてなブックマークに追加
ID 43425
file
title alternative
Rethinking the Distinction between Prior Restraint and Subsequent Punishment: Drawing on Clay Calvert’s Argument about the Constitutionality of Performance Bonds.
Rethinking Prior Restraint-Subsequent Punishment Distinction: Drawing on the Clay Calvert's Argument about Constitutionality of Performance Bond
creator
Yamamura, Toshihide
NDC
Law
abstract
The first hate speech law in Japan contains no legal sanctions. However, it has a de facto impact on society. In fact, drawing on the hate speech law, a local court ordered an injunction against repeated hate speech. However, such a decision have some problems. A particularly important, theoretical problem is that prior injunction based on repeated speech is prior restraint in the first place. Moreover, this problem can be paraphrased with the following question: the constitutionality of restricting future speech based on negative estimation of past speech. So, drawing on Clay Calvert’s discussion about the constitutionality of performance bonds, this Note aims to consider the constitutionality of regulation of the future speech of “past bad speakers”. In this discussion, Calvert argues that such regulative measures blur the distinction between prior restraint and subsequent punishment, and that such measures “are inherently content-based measures and thus should always be subject to strict scrutiny”. Then, by considering this argument, this Note proposes some questions to the arguments of Japanese free speech academics.
journal title
The Hiroshima Law Journal
volume
Volume 40
issue
Issue 4
start page
98
end page
80
date of issued
2017-03-17
publisher
広島大学法学会
issn
0386-5010
ncid
language
jpn
nii type
Departmental Bulletin Paper
HU type
Departmental Bulletin Papers
DCMI type
text
format
application/pdf
text version
publisher
rights
許可なく複製・転載することを禁じる。
department
Graduate School of Social Sciences
他の一覧