Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRubenfeld, Jed
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:40.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:44:35Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:44:35Z
dc.date.issued2002-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifierfss_papers/4177
dc.identifier.contextkey4112242
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/3641
dc.description.abstractIn The First Amendment's Purpose, I criticized the cost-benefit approach to free speech, of which Richard Posner has been a leading advocate. On the cost-benefit view (or at least Posner's view of that view), speech can be prohibited when "in American society its harmful consequences are thought to outweigh its expressive value." Or, in another formulation: "[S]peech should be allowed if but only if its benefits equal or exceed its costs."
dc.titleA Reply to Posner
dc.source.journaltitleFaculty Scholarship Series
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:44:35Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/4177
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5177&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
54StanLRev753.pdf
Size:
956.2Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record