First Amendment jurisprudence has been used to advance a conservative-libertarian judicial agenda

Evidence

The key dynamic here is that First Amendment jurisprudence, especially over the last two decades, has reflected a “conservative-libertarian” interpretation of First Amendment rights. As constitutional law scholar Steven Heyman suggests, “In recent decades, the First Amendment has become one of the most important means by which judges have sought to advance a conservative-libertarian agenda.” This has produced many dramatic judicial decisions, including the US Supreme Court’s rejection of any constraints on the role of money in election campaigns, its rejection of restrictions on hate speech and pornography, and its holding that the right to free association takes precedence over state civil rights laws that bar discrimination. — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 350

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to broader critiques of corporate speech doctrine (Citizens United) and to the book’s ongoing argument that surveillance capitalists weaponize constitutional protections. — connects to: US courts interpret the First Amendment to protect data gathering as corporate free speech. — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 550; Judicial opinions typically provide legal support for decisions reached on nonlegal grounds — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 320; Free-market economic theory now functions as the logic of judicial reasoning — Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s…, 637 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Judicial opinions typically provide legal support for decisions reached on nonlegal grounds #corroborates (0.75) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 320
• Free-market economic theory now functions as the logic of judicial reasoning #corroborates (0.75) — Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos, 637