SATA
ENTRY TYPE:
WORK TITLE: The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book
WORK NOTES:
PSEUDONYM(S):
BIRTHDATE:
WEBSITE: http://www.davidlhudsonjrbooks.com/
CITY: Nashville
STATE:
COUNTRY: United States
NATIONALITY: American
LAST VOLUME: SATA 285
RESEARCHER NOTES:
PERSONAL
Born June 7, 1969; married; wife’s name Carla.
EDUCATION:Duke University, B.A., 1990; Vanderbilt University, J.D., 1994.
ADDRESS
CAREER
Writer, educator, and attorney. Tennessee Supreme Court, Nashville, senior law clerk; practicing attorney in Nashville and scholar at Freedom Forum First Amendment Center, seventeen years; has served as instructor at Nashville School of Law, as adjunct professor at Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, and as adjunct professor of law at Vanderbilt University Law School; Belmont University, Nashville, TN, assistant professor in the College of Law. Justice Robert H. Jackson Fellow, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE); First Amendment Fellow, Freedom Forum Institute. Licensed boxing judge.
AWARDS:Distinguished Faculty Award, Nashville School of Law, 2018.
WRITINGS
Contributing writer for First Amendment Watch, the Free Speech Center, the First Amendment Center website, the American Bar Association’s Preview of United States Supreme Court Cases, and ABA Journal; contributor to other scholarly periodicals and anthologies; feature writer for Fightnews.com.
SIDELIGHTS
[open new]With decades of experience as an attorney in Nashville and law professor at Tennessee universities, David L. Hudson Jr. has written dozens of books for youths and general audiences about issues surrounding the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and other facets of American democracy and history. He earned his bachelor’s degree from Duke and a doctorate in law from Vanderbilt Law School, and he has served on the faculties at Vanderbilt, the Nashville School of Law, and Belmont University. He holds particular expertise in the First Amendment and questions of freedom of speech. One of his characteristic titles is The Constitution Explained: A Guide for Every American, which Laurie Selwyn in Library Journal deemed suitably up-to-date and of interest to “students of political science, government, and teacher education.”
Hudson provides a detailed history of free speech in educational settings in his 2011 volume Let the Students Speak! A History of the Fight for Free Expression in American Schools. Among the earliest free-speech activists in schools were Jehovah’s Witnesses, who in the 1930s objected to saluting the American flag as tantamount to idol worship. Some 134 students across thirteen states were expelled for this objection. The countercultural movement of the sixties saw free-speech activism propagate widely, with students subject to suspension as late as 1964 in Philadelphia for wearing “Freedom Now” buttons to commemorate martyrs of the civil rights movement. The tide turned in 1965, when Iowa sixteen-year-old John Tinker and four classmates wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War and honor soldiers who sacrificed their lives. The punishment of suspension spurred Tinker to file a lawsuit, and in 1969 the Supreme Court decided in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District that the school had erred, marking a momentous victory for free-speech advocates. Further Supreme Court cases in the 1980s, however, saw a more conservative Court give administrators more control over student speech and activism. The tragic massacre at Columbine High School in 1999—which occurred after one of the murderers wrote a gruesome, disturbing essay for English class—led to heightened policing of academic content. One Texas seventh grader was put in juvenile detention for several days after a parent raised an alarm about a Halloween essay that had earned him an A. Similar concerns over bullying, especially cyberbullying, have led schools to punish students even for content posted to social media from outside of the school setting.
Hudson had his own run-in with academic arbiters of free speech back in high school, when he ventured to declare, in discussing professional basketball teams, that the Boston Celtics “suck.” The week prior, another student had used the F-word without incurring punishment, but Hudson was kicked out of class and obliged to confer with an administrator before being allowed to return. In an interview with John W. Whitehead for the Rutherford Institute, Hudson related, “That selective punishment always kind of stuck with me as grossly unfair. I thought it was too much, too draconian a punishment for the speech that I uttered even though I could have chosen my words better.” Reflecting on the state of affairs in the twenty-first century, Hudson remarked: “I don’t think we have enough free speech in our public schools. … Others have noted the similarity between schools and prisons. Unfortunately, students live in an environment where lip service is paid to freedoms found in the Bill of Rights. Students don’t get to experience their freedoms on a day to day basis in their interaction with peers and school officials.” Reviewing Let the Students Speak! for the Voice of Youth Advocates, Diane Colson declared that Hudson “skillfully traces the threads of court opinion and student challenges that have shaped our understanding of students’ freedom to express themselves.”
One of Hudson’s guides for general readers is the second edition of The Handy Presidents Answer Book. With the Q&A-style entries on the first forty-three presidents covering early life, previous offices, opponents, family, postpresidency, and more, Etienne Vallee affirmed in Voice of Youth Advocates that Hudson “has done an excellent job of synthesizing all of the important information.” The Handy American History Answer Book includes eleven chronological chapters as well as in-depth treatments of the realms of music, sports, and entertainment. Highlighted throughout are questions surrounding the experiences of minorities and women. Ann West LaPrise observed in Library Journal that Hudson’s text “divides American history into easy-to-understand parts that mirror how the subject is taught in secondary schools and junior colleges.”
Hudson brought an earlier title up to date with the 2023 edition of The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book: The History and Issues Explained. Beyond profiles of famous justices and rundowns of classic cases like 1954’s Brown v. Board of Education, Hudson focuses on pivotal decisions affecting hot-button issues such as abortion rights, affirmative action, immigration, social media, religious freedom, gun rights, capital punishment, and antiterrorism laws. The cases are arranged by constitutional amendment or major issue and then chronologically within each section. In Booklist, Art Lichtenstein enjoyed the “succinct, often playful layperson’s language” in the answers to topical questions and affirmed that this “clever guide” will “help facilitate argumentation grounded in fact rather than emotion.” School Library Journal reviewer Margaret Nunes appreciated the “sufficient and objective information … organized format, excellent table of contents, and index” in Hudson’s “fairly thorough history,” from which “report writers will glean much.”[close new]
BIOCRIT
PERIODICALS
Booklist, February 15, 2003, Carolyn Phelan, review of The Bill of Rights: The First Ten Amendments of the Constitution, p. 1066; September 15, 2010, Sally Jane, review of The Handy Law Answer Book, p. 80; May 15, 2023, Art Lichtenstein, review of The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book: The History and Issues Explained, 2nd ed., p. 11; December 1, 2023, Art Lichtenstein, review of Capital Punishment: A Documentary and Reference Guide, p. 89.
Choice, July, 2007, R.J. Steamer, review of The Rehnquist Court: Understanding Its Impact and Legacy, p. 1987; July, 2008, R. McGehee, review of Women in Golf: The Players, the History, and the Future of the Sport, p. 1985; May, 2009, R.T. Ivey, review of Encyclopedia of the First Amendment, p. 1674; January, 2014, D. Durant, review of Encyclopedia of the Fourth Amendment, p. 810.
Kirkus Reviews, June 15, 2011, review of The Handy Presidents Answer Book.
Library Journal, September 15, 2011, Mary Jane Brustman, review of Let the Students Speak! A History of the Fight for Free Expression in American Schools, p. 89; September 15, 2015, Ann West LaPrise, review of The Handy American History Answer Book, p. 104; August, 2022, review of The Constitution Explained: A Guide for Every American, p. 123.
Political Science Quarterly, winter, 2007, Jonathan R. Siegel, review of The Rehnquist Court, p. 688.
Reference & Research Book News, May, 2005, review of Open Government: An American Tradition Faces National Security, Privacy, and Other Challenges, p. 179; February, 2006, review of Protecting Ideas; April, 2012, review of Law and the Legal System: An Introduction to Law and Legal Studies in the United States; April, 2013, review of Encyclopedia of the Fourth Amendment.
School Library Journal, April, 2005, Hillias J. Martin, review of Gay Rights, p. 152; February, 2012, Mary Mueller, review of The Handy Presidents Answer Book, p. 78; July, 2012, Carol Fazioli, review of Child Custody Issues, p. 97; February, 2013, Mary Mueller, review of The Handy History Answer Book, p. 66; October, 2023, Margaret Nunes, review of The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book, 2nd ed., p. 62.
Voice of Youth Advocates, October, 2004, Etienne Vallee, review of “Point-Counterpoint: Issues in Contemporary American Society Series,” p. 334; June, 2010, Peggy Fleming, review of The Handy Law Answer Book, p. 183; October, 2010, Nancy Pierce, review of Combat Sports: An Encyclopedia of Wrestling, Fighting, and Mixed Martial Arts, p. 384; October, 2011, Etienne Vallee, review of The Handy Presidents Answer Book, and Diane Colson, review of Let the Students Speak!, both p. 414.
ONLINE
Belmot University website, https://www.belmont.edu/ (June 30, 2024), author profile.
David L. Hudson Jr. website, http://www.davidlhudsonjrbooks.com (March 15, 2015).
First Amendment Center website, http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/ (March 15, 2015), “David L. Hudson, Jr.”
Learn25, https://www.learn25.com/ (June 30, 2024), author profile.
Rutherford Institute website, https://www.rutherford.org/ (September 12, 2012), John W. Whitehead, “Let the Students Speak!: An Interview with David Hudson.”
David L Hudson, Jr.
David L Hudson, Jr.David L. Hudson, Jr., J.D. is an Assistant Professor of Law, teaching First Amendment Law and Bar Exam Workshop at Belmont University’s College of Law. For 17 years, he was an attorney and scholar at the First Amendment Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Hudson also has taught classes at Vanderbilt Law School and the Nashville School of Law, and he served as a senior law clerk for the Tennessee Supreme Court. In June 2018, the Nashville School of Law awarded him its Distinguished Faculty Award. He earned his undergraduate degree from Duke University and his law degree from Vanderbilt Law School. He is an author, co-author, or co-editor of more than 40 books, including Visible Ink Press’s The Handy Law Answer Book, The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book, and The Handy American History Answer Book, as well as Let the Students Speak: A History of the Fight for Free Expression in American Schools and The Encyclopedia of the First Amendment (co-editor). He writes regularly for the American Bar Association’s Preview of United States Supreme Court Cases and ABA Journal, and the First Amendment Watch, and the Free Speech Center. He lives in Nashville, Tennessee.
PROF. DAVID L. HUDSON, JR.
Prof. David L. Hudson, Jr.
David L. Hudson, Jr., is an award-winning professor, world-champion boxing judge, and leading First Amendment expert. He has authored, co-authored, or co-edited more than 40 books, including The First Amendment: Freedom of Speech (Thomson Reuters, 2012); Let the Students Speak!: A History of the Fight for Freedom of Expression in American Schools (Beacon Press, 2011), The Encyclopedia of the First Amendment (CQ Press, 2008), and Boxing in America: An Autopsy (Praeger, 2012). Hudson is a Justice Robert H. Jackson Fellow for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and a First Amendment Fellow with the Freedom Forum Institute. A graduate of Vanderbilt Law School, he writes regularly for the ABA Journal and the American Bar Association.
David L. Hudson
David L. Hudson
Assistant Professor of Law
COLLEGE OF LAW
B.A., Duke University; J.D., Vanderbilt University Law School
(615) 460-8270
david.hudson@belmont.edu
Biography
David L. Hudson, Jr., an Assistant Professor of Law, teaches Legal Information and Communication at Belmont. He is the author, co-author, or co-editor of more than 40 books. For much of his career, he has worked on First Amendment issues. He serves as a Justice Robert H. Jackson Legal Fellow for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and a First Amendment Fellow for the Freedom Forum Institute. For 17 years, he was an attorney and scholar at the First Amendment Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Hudson has taught classes at Vanderbilt Law School and the Nashville School of Law. In June 2018, the Nashville School of Law awarded him its Distinguished Faculty Award. He earned his undergraduate degree from Duke University and his law degree from Vanderbilt Law School. Professor Hudson's published works have been cited and relied upon by other scholars and courts. Hudson also is a licensed boxing judge and has judged a dozen world title bouts.
Areas of expertise: First Amendment issues, Constitutional law, Free speech
PUBLICATIONS
SSRN
Selected Books
David L. Hudson, Teen Legal Rights (Forthcoming, July 2024)
David L. Hudson, Capital Punishment: A Documentary and Reference Guide (2023)
David L. Hudson, The Constitution Explained: A Guide for Every American (2022)
First Things First: A Modern Coursebook on Free Speech Fundamentals, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, 2019. (co-author with Ronald K.L. Collins and Will Creeley)
Equal Protection: Documents Decoded. ABC-CLIO, 2018.
Freedom of Speech: Documents Decoded. ABC-CLIO, 2017.
The First Amendment: Freedom of Speech. Thomson Reuters, 2012.
Encyclopedia of the Fourth Amendment (two-volume set). SAGE, 2013. (co-editor with Dr. John Vile).
Let the Students Speak!: A History of the Fight for Freedom of Expression in American Schools. Beacon Press, 2011.
The Handy Law Answer Book. Visible Ink Press, 2011.
Encyclopedia of the First Amendment (two-volume set). CQ Press, 2009. (co-editor with Dr. John Vile and David Schultz).
The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book. Visible Ink Press, 2008.
The Rehnquist Court: Understanding Its Impact and Legacy. Praeger, 2006.
The First Amendment in Schools: A Guide from the First Amendment Center. ASCD, 2003. (co-author with four others).
The Silencing of Student Voices: Preserving Free Speech in America’s Schools. Newseum, 2003.
Law Review/Journal Articles
David L. Hudson, Jr., Essay: A Continuing Constitutional Trend of Using the First to Interpret the Second, 55 Creighton L. Rev 297 (2022). | SSRN
David L. Hudson, Jr., Fundamental First Amendment Principles, 42 N. Ill. U.L. Rev. 271 (2022). (co-authored with Jacob Glenn)
David L. Hudson, Jr., The Other Bar Hurdle: An Examination of the Character and Fitness Requirement for Bar Admission, 48 Mitchell Hamline L. Rev. 500 (2022). (co-authored with Andrea Gemignani)
David L. Hudson, Jr., The Roberts Court: Its First Amendment Free Expression Jurisprudence: 2005-2021, 87 Brooklyn L. Rev. 5 (2021)(co-authored with Ronald KL Collins). | SSRN
David L. Hudson, Jr., Patel v. Garland, Docket No. 20-979. 49 Preview Sup. Ct. Cas. 23 (Nov., 2021)
David L. Hudson, Jr., Ramirez v. Collier, Docket No. 21-5592. 49 Preview Sup. Ct. Cas. 40 (Nov., 2021)
David L. Hudson, Jr., Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.: The Court Protects Student Social Media but Leaves Unanswered Questions, 2020-2021 Cato Sup. Ct. Rev. 93 (2021) | SSRN
Hudson, David L., Jr. Supreme Court Examines Student Speech, Disclosure Law, and the Free Exercise Clause. 48 Preview U.S. Sup. Ct. Cas. 22 (2021).
David L. Hudson, Jr., The Supreme Court's Worst Decision in Recent Years - Garcetti vs. Ceballos, the Dred Scott Decision for Public Employees, 47 Mitchell Hamline L. Rev. (2021). | SSRN
David L. Hudson Jr., Essay: The Fighting Words Doctrine: Alive and Well in the Lower Courts, 19 U.N.H.L. Rev. 1 (2020). | SSRN
David L. Hudson Jr., and Glenn, Jacob D. Article: Fixed Stars: Famous First Amendment Phrases and their Indelible Impact, 15 Charleston L. Rev. 189 (2020) | SSRN
David L. Hudson Jr., Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’s Premier Defender of the Fourth Amendment, 44 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 19 (2020). | SSRN
David L. Hudson Jr., Unsettled Questions in Student Speech Law, 22 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 1113 (2020). | SSRN
David L. Hudson Jr., Anti-SLAPP Coverage and the First Amendment: Hurdles to Defamation Suits in Political Campaigns, 69 Am. U. L. Rev. 1541 (2020). | SSRN
David L. Hudson Jr., Thurgood Marshall in Tennessee: His Defense of Accused Rioters, His near-Miss with a Lynch Mob, 56 TENN. B.J. 16 (2020). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr. David L. Cyberbullying and Free Speech, 50 New Mex. L. Rev. 287 (2020). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr. David L. and Policinski, Gene. Essay: Understanding First Amendment Freedoms Through the Remarkable Life of “The Greatest” – Muhammad Ali. 53 Creighton L. Rev. 267 (2020). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr. David L., The Content-Discrimination Principle and the Impact of Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 70 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 259 (2019). | SSRN (reprinted in First Amendment Law Handbook (2020)).
Hudson, Jr., David L., Justice Kennedy and the First Amendment (November 13, 2018). 9 HLRe 49 (2019); Belmont University College of Law Research Paper No. 2018-37 | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Attorney Advertising in 'The Litigators' and Modern-Day America: The Continued Importance of the Public's Need for Legal Information (2018). University of Memphis Law Review, Vol. 48, No. 960, (2018). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Losing the Spirit of Tinker v. Des Moines and the Urgent Need to Protect Student Speech (March 4, 2018). 66 Clev. St. L. Rev. Et Cetera 2 (2018). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Thirty Years of Hazelwood and Its Spread to Colleges and University Campuses (2018). 61 Howard L.J. 491 (2018). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L. and Harvey, Emily H., First Amendment Tests From the Burger Court: Will They Be Flipped? (2018). Mitchell Hamline L. Rev. (2018). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Essay: Justice Thurgood Marshall, Great Defender of First Amendment Free-Speech Rights for the Powerless 2 Howard Human & Civil Rights L. Rev. 167 (2018). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Anti-Profanity Laws and the First Amendment. 42 T. Marshall L. Rev. 203 (2017). | SSRN
Kinsler, Jeffrey and Hudson, Jr., David L., The Secret to 85% First-Time Bar Passage Rates (2017). 40 N.C. Cent. L. Rev. 92 (2017). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L. and Harvey, Emily H., Dissecting the Hybrid Rights Exception: Should it Be Expanded or Rejected? (2016). 38 UALR L. Rev. 449 (2016). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., First Amendment Right to Receive Information and Ideas Justifies Citizens' Videotaping of the Police (2016). 10 U. St. Thomas J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 89 (2016). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Black Armbands, 'Boobies' Bracelets and the Need to Protect Student Speech (2013). 81 UMKC L. Rev. 595 (2013). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Time for the Supreme Court to Address Off-Campus, Online Student Speech (2012). Oregon Law Review, Vol. 91, 2012; Belmont University College of Law Research Paper No. 2018-7. | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., The Secondary-Effects Doctrine: Stripping Away First Amendment Freedoms (2012). 23 Stanford Law & Pol. Rev. 19 (2012). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Pearson v. Callahan and Qualified Immunity: Impact on First Amendment Law (2011). 10 First Amend. L. Rev. 125 (2011). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Blogs and the First Amendment (2006). 11 NEXUS 129 (2006). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Justice Brennan's Significant Departure and Warning of an Evisceration (2005). 10 NEXUS 93 (2005). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Reflecting on the Virtual Child Porn Decision (2002). 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 211 (2002). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Fear of Violence in Our Schools: Is ‘Undifferentiated Fear’ in the Age of Columbine Leading to a Suppression of Student Speech? (2002). 42 Washburn L.J. 79 (2002). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Justice Clarence Thomas: The Emergence of a Commercial-Speech Protector (2002). 35 Creighton L. Rev. 485 (2002). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L. and John E. Ferguson Jr., The Courts’ Inconsistent Treatment of Bethel v. Fraser and the Curtailment of Student Rights (2002). 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 181 (2002). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., Censorship of Student Internet Speech: The Effect of Diminishing Student Rights, Fear of the Internet and Columbine (2000). 2000 L.Rev. M.S.U.-D.C.L. 199 (2000). | SSRN
Hudson, Jr., David L., The Secondary Effects Doctrine: 'The Evisceration of First Amendment Freedoms' (1997). 37 Washburn L.J. 55 (1997). | SSRN
Selected Presentations:
Hudson, Jr. David L. So To Speak: The Free Speech Podcast. 'So to Speak' podcast: Sarah Palin v. New York Times (February 22, 2022)
Hudson, Jr. David L. Panelist, "Social Media Platforms as Public Forums, Trumping the Private Actor Rule, and Protecting Online Users," University of San Francisco Law Review Free Speec Symposium, (Jan. 28, 2022).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Panelist with University of Missouri-Kansas City on Bethel School Dist. v. Fraser (1986) and Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969). (Jan. 26, 2022).
Hudson, Jr. David L. So To Speak: The Free Speech Podcast. Episode 151. Fighting Words (Jan. 13, 2022).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Discussion Facilitator at the Fall 2021 National Association of College and University Attorneys CLE Conference. "Free Speech Issues on Campus." (Nov. 10, 2021).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Speaker at the East-West Center's 2021 Senior Journalists Seminar. "First Amendment Overview and the Hate Speech Problem." (November 8, 2021).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Panel speaker at the 2021 Freedom of Information Oklahoma First Amendment Congress: From What You Share to What You Wear: The Limits of Free Speech On and Off Campus. (Nov. 2, 2021).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Co-Presenter, "Tinker v. Des Moines," UMKC John F. Tinker Foundation Symposium, 2021
Hudson, Jr. David L. Co-Presenter, “The First Amendment Right to Record Public Officials,” Colorado Judicial Conference, 2021.
Hudson, Jr. David L. Panelist, "Open Courts & Racial Justice,” First Amendment Watch at New York University Public Forum, March 24, 2021.
Hudson, Jr. David L. Keynote speaker at the 2020 Northeast Regional Virtual Conference for the Social Studies: Student speech and the First Amendment (Oct. 4, 2020).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Speaker at the St. Francis School of Law Webinar: Blurred Lines: Legal Perspectives on Free Speech and Social Media (Sept. 17, 2020).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Speaker at the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University “America’s Amendments” Webinar: The Bill of Rights: The First Ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Sept. 14, 2020).
Hudson, Jr. David L. Panelist, "Lawyer Ethics in Speaking to the Media," Tennessee Bar Association Reporter's Workshop, May 17, 2019.
Hudson, Jr. David L. Panelist, "Use of Social Media by Public Employees," 2019 Joint Judicial and Senior Managers Spring Conference, Washington D.C., May 9, 2019.
Hudson, Jr. David L. Debater, U.S. Intelligence Squared, “Trigger Warning: Safe Spaces Are Dangerous,” June 2018.
Hudson, Jr. David L. Testimony before U.S. House Subcommittee, “First Amendment Protections on Public College and University Campuses,” April 2017.
Selected Articles
"Supreme Court Needs to Clarify True Threat Exception; Case Out of Colorado Could Be the Vehicle," First Amendment Watch at New York University. December 2022.
"Lawyers have an obligation to ensure employees don’t solicit clients, new ABA ethics opinion says", ABA Journal, April 2022.
"Nonexistent critical race theory curriculum is caught in the crosshairs," ABA Journal, February, 2022.
"First Amendment Teacher Guide: Disinformation and the First Amendment," First Amendment Watch at New York University, December 2021.
"Is the right to assemble and demonstrate under threat?" ABA Journal, December 2021
"Prosecutorial ethics are getting a fresh look from criminal justice reformers," ABA Journal, December, 2021.
"New ABA ethics opinion clarifies obligations for language access in lawyer-client relationships," ABA Journal, October, 2021.
"Florida Supreme Court order on diversity in CLEs devalues the legal profession's inclusion goals, experts say." ABA Journal, October, 2021.
"States Drive a Wave of Bills Affecting Transgender Youth," ABA Journal, Aug. 2021
“Chancellor Heard and His Defense of Academic Freedom,” Tennessee Bar Journal, May-June 2021.
“What is a lawyer's ethical duty to check out a client's claim before filing an action?” ABA Journal, April-May 2021.
“First Amendment Teacher Guide: The Civil Rights Movement and the First Amendment: How Free Expression Freedoms Developed During the Struggle for Equality,” First Amendment Watch at New York University, April 2021.
“First Amendment Teacher Guide: Access to Courts and Court Records,” First Amendment Watch at New York University, March 2021.
“How close can you be to opposing counsel without it being a conflict of interest? Ethics opinion examines personal relationships and conflict,” ABA Journal, February/March 2021.
"Ethics opinion helps define ABA guidance on professional misconduct," ABA Journal, October 2020.
Hudson, David L., Jr. Who bears the burden of proof to show the exact part of a state law the noncitizen was convicted under? 47 Preview U.S. Sup. Ct. Cas. 6 (Mar., 2020).
Hudson, David L., Jr. Must a state drug offense match the elements of a generic federal offense in order to qualify for enhancement purposes under the Armed Career Criminal Act? 47 Preview U.S. Sup. Ct. Cas. 22 (Jan., 2020).
Hudson, David L., Jr. Does a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend an adverse judgment in a habeas claim count as part of the first habeas claim or as part of a generally impermissible second or successive habeas claim? 47 Preview U.S. Sup. Ct. Cas. 23 (Dec., 2019).
Hudson, David L., Jr. Is a request for equitable tolling in an immigration removal case a question of law that provides federal appeals courts with jurisdiction or is it more of a question of fact that is beyond the courts’ jurisdiction? 47 Preview U.S. Sup. Ct. Cas. 26 (Dec., 2019).
”Lawyers and Cognitive Decline: Diminished capacity may bring ethics problems for sufferers,” ABA Journal, Sept. 2018.
“When Do Rants Exceed First Amendment Boundaries,” ABA Journal, August 2018.
“Ida B. Wells: Fearless Journalist from Memphis Who Changed the World,” Tennessee Bar Journal, August 2018.
“Can Anti-Profanity Laws and the Fighting Words Doctrine Be Squared with the First Amendment,” ABA Journal, April 2017.
“Stifling Speech: Government invokes doctrine to silence speech it doesn’t like,” ABA Journal, Sept. 2017.
“No Free Speech for You,” Slate, Aug. 4, 2017.
“Public Employees, Private Speech: 1st Amendment doesn’t always protect government workers,” ABA Journal, May 2017.
“How Tennessee discriminated against a talented Vanderbilt law grad,” The Tennessean, May 4, 2017.
“Is Cyberbullying Free Speech,” ABA Journal, November 2016.
“Explainer: how campus policies limit free speech,” The Conversation, July 31, 2016.
“These lawyers battle in the boxing ring as well as the courtroom,” ABA Journal, October 2015.
Let the Students Speak!: An Interview with David Hudson
0 0 0
September 12, 2012
By John W. Whitehead
September 12, 2012
In 2002, high school senior Joseph Frederick earned a five-day suspension for holding up a banner with the message “BONG HITS 4 JESUS” as the Olympic Winter Games torch relay passed his high school. And as recently as September 2010, students in Baltic High School in South Dakota were banned from wearing Keep A Breast Foundation’s “I ♥ Boobies” Bracelets, intended to raise awareness for breast cancer.
In his new book Let the Students Speak!, First Amendment scholar David L. Hudson, Jr. gives a detailed history of student free speech. Hudson begins with the earliest cases from the 19th century and he introduces the earliest student rights heroes: the Jehovah’s Witnesses. In 1936, at least 134 students in thirteen states were expelled for refusing to salute the American flag at school, claiming idol worship went against their religious beliefs. The fight for student rights only increased in the 60s and 70s, with the cases of Civil Rights activists and war protestors. In 1964, several students at a Philadelphia high school were suspended for wearing “Freedom Now” buttons honoring Civil Rights martyrs.
Then in December 1965, sixteen-year-old John Tinker and four of his classmates were suspended for wearing black armbands to school in honor of the soldiers who died in Vietnam and in opposition to the war. Tinker filed suit against the school district, taking his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and ultimately changing the law, for the better, for countless students. On February 24th, 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its momentous decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, in favor of the students. As Hudson recounts in his book, Tinker was a huge victory for student rights. “The highest court in the land,” Hudson writes, “had ruled that [students] had a voice in their own schools.”
The 1980s, writes Hudson, “weren’t so propitious for students,” however. The U.S. Supreme Court became more conservative with the addition of new justices and society retreated “from some of the perceived excesses of the sixties and seventies,” Hudson argues. In fact, two landmark Supreme Court cases, Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser and Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, “represented a significant step away from the protections of Tinker.” The Fraser case served as a “warning shot” to students, giving school officials more control over student speech. And according to Hudson, Hazelwood was a “death knell for student rights,” giving schools authority to censor articles in student run newspapers.
With the complex task of providing a safe environment for students in this post-Columbine era, many school officials, Hudson believes, do not consider First Amendment rights a high priority. In a time of zero tolerance, student’s freedom of expression means little. Hudson speaks to various students who were suspended for violent-themed writings or drawings, even when the pieces in question were class assignments or entries in personal journals. Texas seventh grader Christopher Beamon was incarcerated for a Halloween story he wrote for an English class—an assignment for which his teacher gave him an A.
Hudson works to remind students that they must continue the fight for free speech. “The battle for student free speech rights rages on in a dizzying array of contexts,” writes Hudson, from cyber bullying and book banning to controversies over tattoos and gay and lesbian T-shirts. And in the age of the Internet, there is still much uncertainty over how far school authority should reach. But Hudson is hopeful that soon all students will go to schools “where debate and discussion triumph over control and censorship.”
David L. Hudson, Jr. is a First Amendment scholar with the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University, where he writes for the Center’s website, speaks to the media and lectures on a variety of First Amendment issues. As Adjunct Professor of Law, he teaches First Amendment and Professional Responsibility classes at Vanderbilt Law School. He also teaches classes at Middle Tennessee State University and the Nashville School of Law. He is the author, co-author or co-editor of more than 30 books, including The Encyclopedia of the First Amendment (CQ Press, 2008)(one of three co-editors), The Rehnquist Court: Understanding Its Impact and Legacy (Praeger, 2006), The Bill of Rights: The First Ten Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Enslow, 2002), and the Handy Supreme Court Answer Book (Visible Ink Press, 2008). He has written several books devoted to student-speech issues and others areas of student rights, including Let the Students Speak! (Beacon Press, 2011). He serves as a First Amendment contributing editor for the American Bar Association’s Preview of United States Supreme Court Cases. His articles have been published in the National Law Journal, ABA Journal, and Tennessee Bar Journal. He is a member of the First Amendment Lawyers Association and a graduate of Duke and Vanderbilt Law School.
David took a few minutes out of his busy schedule to talk with me about the First Amendment rights of students.
John W. Whitehead: In your book, you assert or posit that you believe students are the future of our constitutional democracy. However, in public schools students’ freedom of speech and expression is greatly limited. Do we really have free speech in our public schools?
David Hudson: I don’t think we have enough free speech in our public schools. You have written about the criminalization of America’s school children. I believe you and others have noted the similarity between schools and prisons. Unfortunately, students live in an environment where lip service is paid to freedoms found in the Bill of Rights. Students don’t get to experience their freedoms on a day to day basis in their interaction with peers and school officials. So while we have certainly some level of free speech, I think that it has waned since the height of the Supreme Court’s Tinker precedent. There have been some disturbing trends over the last decade or so that give grave cause for concern.
JWW: What trends are you talking about?
DH: Greater censorship. An example is the rise of zero tolerance. A kid plays cops and robbers and is expelled from school for 90 days. There has also been a growing tendency to increase school jurisdictional authority by punishing students for off-campus on-line speech. Authorities assume that the school can reach out beyond the schoolhouse gate and punish kids for what they do in their homes. The inclination to worry about students being bullied is natural and valid. However, in the push for anti-bullying and, in particular, cyber bullying policies, I think sometimes we go too far. School shootings like Columbine certainly produced a dramatic reduction in student freedoms, especially those found in the First and Fourth Amendments. A related trend is fear of new technology. Lastly, there is the composition of the Supreme Court. The Court that decided Tinker was more sensitive to the issue of student rights than the Roberts Court.
JWW: I have noticed that foreign students know quite a bit about the Bill of Rights. But when I talk to American high school students and even law students, they have trouble articulating what is in the First Amendment. Do you think that contributes to the problem?
DH: The lack of civic education is alarming and is something we need to improve. We certainly need a greater national initiative to improve civic education.
JWW: I often hear from school officials who don’t want the courts involved in school matters. They believe they are better situated to determine what is appropriate in the schoolhouse. However, there has to be a neutral arbitrator or court that will step into certain school situations and apply the law. For example, kids who wear a confederate flag on T-shirts into a school. We get those kinds of cases. To what extent do you think school officials may be better qualified than a court when an alleged disturbance is caused by free expression?
DH: If we simply delegate everything to school officials, then constitutional rights will shrink. School officials don’t want the courts being super-personnel managers, but the reality is without the courts we would not have fundamental protections for students, or public employees. The Court, not school administrators, gave us the Tinker and Pickering cases. There has to be a place for judicial review of school official policy. It is not sufficient to rely on the good will of school officials who often do not act consistently with the Constitution.
JWW: I am concerned that the courts are giving almost complete deference to schools. Historically, the Warren Court, for example, carefully examined the civil liberties aspects of these cases. To me it seems the Roberts Court isn’t looking at those key issues.
DH: The Roberts Court is interesting. It has had some strong points. Snyder v. Phelps and U.S. v. Stevens were good opinions. I think Chief Justice Roberts wrote both of them. In those situations, I thought the Court did a good job explaining that legislatures don’t have the authority to create new unprotected categories of speech. But I do agree with you that in the public school context, it’s a mixed bag with the Roberts Court. I often wonder if the current Court or the Rehnquist Court or the Burger Court would decide the Tinker case the same way today.
JWW: Do you have your doubts about that?
DH: I wonder about it sometimes.
JWW: I have my doubts about it. Chapters Three and Eight of your book, Let The Students Speak!, aptly discuss religious freedom. What role do you think religion plays, and should play, in the right of free speech for students? For example, consider a student who wants to mention Jesus, Yahweh, or Allah at a graduation speech being censored by school officials. What do you think of that?
DH: Unfortunately, some courts have over-reacted and claimed that schools are religion free zones. I don’t think that is correct. Students should have the right to engage in religious expression. When schools censor religious expression, they violate the most fundamental precept of our free speech jurisprudence: government officials should not engage in viewpoint discrimination of private speech.
JWW: Do you think it is appropriate for children to speak about drugs, sex and violence in the schools? A lot of students complain that political correctness has greatly limited their right to talk about different subjects. Is there a line you draw with these topics? Why shouldn’t students be able to bring up these issues in the classroom and speak about them in essays?
DH: Certainly I believe that students should not be punished for general speech in an essay. Older students especially, should have the right to discuss these issues. Yes, without a good teacher in command of the classroom, some discussions could get out of hand. However, the general distrust and fear of freedom of speech makes schools over restrictive, unfortunately. I do think that there should be more discussion of pressing and contemporary issues in schools.
JWW: A lot of public school teachers I talk to have very little knowledge of constitutional rights. What’s more, teachers seem to think they are in school to keep order, not to promote debate and free speech. Part of the problem is this lack of civic education. Teachers don’t know much about free speech. Thus, when a student says something that seems really off balance, they try to stifle it, censoring the student. We had a case where a student wrote about Jesus as a historical character. The teacher gave the paper back to the student saying it is illegal to write about Jesus in public schools. To me it seems a little crazy that a teacher in the United States is saying those kinds of things.
DH: I agree that there is a need for better civic education among teachers. I don’t know how to affect that, but believe teachers ought to be reading your weekly commentaries and our websites. It is too bad that so many school officials focus on order and act in an authoritarian manner. They don’t think about freedom as much as they should.
JWW: We currently have a case in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals where high school students were ordered to remove their flag T-shirts because they might be seen as offensive on Cinco de Mayo.
DH: I wrote about that case. It is a tragedy to me that those kids were prohibited from wearing those T-shirts.
JWW: I was asked about what the schools should have done. I responded by saying, “If school officials really wanted to address this issue then why not have a school wide debate the week before on the issue of the flag and Cinco de Mayo and get all the students involved?” We would not be involved in these cases if the schools would do their job and promote free discussion.
DH: Exactly. Often times in the rush to censorship we miss a lot of potentially positive teaching moments. That to me is a particular travesty of justice in the Cinco de Mayo case. I was appalled when I read the district court opinion.
JWW: Then there was the case of the 8th grader who wrote a Halloween piece that was considered so violent he was sent to jail.
DH: Yes. Christopher Beamon. I believe he may have been a 7th grader. He wrote a Halloween essay on which he received an “A.” Another student’s parent complained and Beamon eventually spent 5 or 6 days in juvenile detention until the media got a hold of it and finally he was released. That is a classic example of gross over-reaction.
JWW: That it was a creative writing assignment is amazing.
DH: Some counter by saying Dylan Klebold of Columbine wrote a very chilling essay in his English class in February of 1999 that his English teacher found grisly and horrible. Sometimes you can detect a potential problem. Unfortunately, the other approach has led to gross over-reaction. Stephen King wrote a good piece on the issue, saying if he got judged by the content of his writing, they would have kicked him out of school. Often times the zero tolerance mentality has certainly spread far beyond its appropriate or original reach to free speech. With creative writing, the writer should have a pretty broad license to express him or herself.
JWW: Of course. To give you an example, when I was in grade school I wrote a couple of essays. The teacher came and led me to the principal’s office and they counseled me. I’d written on space aliens invading the Earth. I never forgot that experience.
DH: I was in high school and I was talking about basketball and made the statement that, “The Celtics suck.” I got kicked out of class, and I had to go to see the administrator before I was even allowed back in school. I remember a student the previous week had actually dropped the “F” bomb and wasn’t punished at all. That selective punishment always kind of stuck with me as grossly unfair. I thought it was too much, too draconian a punishment for the speech that I uttered even though I could have chosen my words better.
JWW: Where do you decide that violent writing indicates eminent violent danger? Is there a way we can detect that danger so that we don’t destroy free speech?
DH: I think that you have to examine the writing to determine if a specific individual is being targeted. You have to look at the history of the student and determine if the student has violent propensities or a really bad disciplinary record. There conceivably could be instances where a true threat exists. However, we have to be very very careful that we don’t overreact and confuse free speech with true threat. True threats are a narrow categorical exception to the First Amendment.
JWW: Let’s look at strict dress codes. For example, some codes don’t allow students to have any graphics on a T-shirt. Even the polo symbol on Ralph Lauren is suspect because the little guy on the horse has a mallet in his hand.
DH: When I speak to public school students, the number one complaint they have is that they are not allowed to dress and express themselves as they like. I understand that some say we need these uniforms because as social equalizers, they are conducive to learning. But I think restrictive dress codes squelch individuality. Young people need to have the right to express their preferences for music, sports, political sayings and so on. When you trample that, you take away an important avenue to assert beliefs.
JWW: Do you think Tinker supports dress codes or no dress codes -- that is, in the so-called disruptive context?
DH: If you look at the larger principle of Tinker, it is certainly about freedom of expression for students. Unless the student expression is substantially disruptive or unless school officials can reasonably forecast a substantial disruption, then the default position should be freedom.
JWW: Do you think that students have more or less freedom of expression on the internet? We have gotten a few cases in here, for example, where a student criticizes a teacher on Facebook and is disciplined by school officials.
DH: I get those all the time. In 1998 Judge Rodney Sipple wrote a federal district court opinion in the Beussink case, where he said “disliking student speech is not an acceptable justification for limiting student speech” or something to that effect. Students should have the right to make critical comments. And school officials should not be punishing students simply for offensive or inappropriate speech. Often times students are punished for speech that doesn’t fit into the categories of Tinker. On one hand, you have school officials vying for jurisdiction when there is a substantial disruption to the school environment but, on the other hand, you have kids being punished simply for speech that school officials don’t like.
JWW: A lot of young people feel like they are viewed as suspect, as the enemy. Many believe adults think there is something wrong with them. What do you think has brought about the idea that the young people and what they have to say is dangerous? Is there a historical nexus?
DH: We’ve got a different composition of the Court. We have a fear of new technology. We have a decline in social activism and an opposition to the perceived excesses of the 60s and early 70s. Then there is the fear of the school shooter even though, as you wrote in an excellent commentary a couple years ago, there really is no one profile of the school shooter.
JWW: An FBI study has proven that.
DH: I think there are a multiplicity of factors. I think at the root, it may be this absolute under-appreciation of civic education and constitutional freedoms by government and school officials. I think there needs to be a fundamental shift to civic education and to teaching students truly what the freedoms in the Bill of Rights mean as opposed to this authoritarian regime concept that prefers censorship to teaching.
JWW: What do you suggest students do in order to regain some of their First Amendment freedoms? Is there a solution?
DH: They could peacefully petition for change. They could try to get support from the faculty. A teacher or two could be helpful. They could form groups. Students have rights under the Equal Access Act. They could write either in the school newspaper or the underground newspapers. In some situations, they may have to contact The Rutherford Institute, the Student Press Law Center or other groups dedicated to fighting for freedom.
JWW: Look at your crystal ball. The way things are going now, what do you think the future of free speech is in our schools? What do you project? Be realistic.
DH: I am very concerned. Unless we have a fundamental recommitment to civic education and a move away from this censorship mentality, I am afraid we are going to stay where we are or perhaps get worse.
Hudson, David L. Let the Students Speak!: A History of the Fight for Free Expression in American Schools. Beacon Press, 2011. 208p. $17. Trade pb. 978-0-8070-4454-4. Index. Source Notes.
As the ink was still drying on the original Bill of Rights, Americans began questioning how these rights would be implemented in the real world. Over time, the Supreme Court has provided some guidelines, such as narrowing freedom of speech to forbid "... falsely shouting fire in a theater...." Yet it took many years before people began to consider that the Bill of Rights might offer protection to students, even against the rules of school authorities. Hudson's informative book introduces readers to many of these early pioneers. For example, in 1921, seventeen year-old Pearl Pugsley sued the Knobel School Board in Arkansas because they banned the use of cosmetics. Many students have sued over issues regarding the Pledge of Allegiance. During the Vietnam War, students fought to wear buttons and armbands protesting the war. Sometimes these students were supported by the court system, creating law that could present further interpretations and challenges.
Hudson, a scholar on First Amendment freedoms, skillfully traces the threads of court opinion and student challenges that have shaped our understanding of students' freedom to express themselves. Young readers with an interest in law will find Hudson's book quite readable, with source notes for each chapter and an index of the seventy-plus cases cited in the text. This is recommended for senior high school libraries, community college libraries, and public libraries that serve patrons interested in legal issues.--Diane Colson.
4Q Better than most, marred only by occasional lapses.
3P Will appeal with pushing.
M Middle School (defined as grades 6-8).
J Junior High (defined as grades 7-9).
S Senior High (defined as grades 10-12).
A/YA Adult-marketed book recommended for YAs.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2011 E L Kurdyla Publishing LLC
http://www.voya.com
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
Colson, Diane. "Hudson, David L.: Let the Students Speak!: A History of the Fight for Free Expression in American Schools." Voice of Youth Advocates, vol. 34, no. 4, Oct. 2011, p. 414. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A270374389/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=bf3e530a. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.
Hudson, David L., Jr. The Handy Presidents Answer Book, 2nd ed. Visible Ink, 2011. 400p. $21.95 Oversize pb. 978-1-57859-317-0. Index. Illus. Photos.
Each president of the United States of America, from George Washington to Barack Obama, has a fascinating story. Though readers may be most familiar with the lives of the famous presidents, they likely will not know how those presidents got where they did or what happened after they left the White House. In The Handy Presidents Answer Book, Hudson presents each president in chronological order. An introduction explains the origins of the presidency and the official duties of the chief executive, the roles played by political parties, and presidential elections.
Written in the form of questions and answers, each presidential entry features the man's early life and career, any political office he held before running for president, major events of his presidency, and his postpresidency. Each entry is concise and hits the highlights of the individuals' lives. Presidential opponents are presented, along with notable politicians, family members, and other actors who went on to influence the course of history. Hudson has done an excellent job of synthesizing all of the important information about each of our nation's forty-three presidents. This volume is complemented by a presidential biography section and provides many useful facts and trivia. Readers interested in presidential history will enjoy this book, but it will require some promotion to appeal to a larger audience.--Etienne Vallee.
4Q Better than most, marred only by occasional lapses.
2P For the YA reader with a special interest in the subject.
J Junior High (defined as grades 7-9).
S Senior High (defined as grades 10-12).
A/YA Adult-marketed book recommended for YAs.
Vallee, Etienne
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2011 E L Kurdyla Publishing LLC
http://www.voya.com
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
Vallee, Etienne. "Hudson, David L., Jr.: The Handy Presidents Answer Book, 2nd ed." Voice of Youth Advocates, vol. 34, no. 4, Oct. 2011, p. 414. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A270374388/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=8de3a0e1. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.
Hudson, David L. Jr. The Handy American History Answer Book. Visible Ink. (Handy Answer Book). 2015.450p. photos, bibliog. index. ISBN 9781578594719. pap. $21.95; ebk. ISBN 9781578595471. REF
With 11 chapters on historical eras and three more on sports, music, and entertainment, this resource divides American history into easy-to-understand parts that mirror how the subject is taught in secondary schools and junior colleges. A further dividing of those chapters into 92 thematic sections with three to 15 topics each will further help users to comprehend their curricular content. Question-and-answer pairs range from a short paragraph to almost two pages in length each, and helpfully discuss the treatment of minority groups and women over time in this country. Some black-and-white photographs are included and a few maps show where the country was in its development in the chapters covering eras before 1912. The 19-page index will help the user to find material quickly and the material is also supplemented by a time line, annotated lists of states and presidents, and the text of the U.S. Constitution. The American Heritage Encyclopedia of American History, the Oxford Companion to U.S. History, and The New York Public Library American History Desk Reference all cover similar detail but none offers the question-and-answer format of this work. VERDICT While this source is aimed at students, general users will find it useful, too; it is suitable for both the ready reference and the circulating sections of public libraries.--Ann West LaPrise, Huron Sch. Dlst., New Boston, Ml
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2015 A wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
http://www.libraryjournal.com/
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
LaPrise, Ann West. "Hudson, David L. Jr.: The Handy American History Answer Book." Library Journal, vol. 140, no. 15, 15 Sept. 2015, p. 104. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A429499649/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=3b5cfed1. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.
POLITICAL SCIENCE
Hudson, David. The Constitution Explained: A Guide for Every American. Visible Ink. Jun. 2022.384p. ISBN 9781578597505. pap. $24.95. REF
Focusing on the Constitution's history, including the Articles of Confederation, the Philadelphia Convention, the Bill of Rights, and selected other amendments, Hudson's (law, Belmont Univ.; First Things First) simply written book includes chapters ranging from four ("Articles of Confederation") to 33 pages ("First Amendment") in length and references historical and current events (President Trump's impeachments; the riot on January 6, 2021). A few topics, such as Black Lives Matter, are only mentioned as illustration captions, and Hudson does not examine potential applications of the Constitution to contemporary issues. The work ends with a six-page chapter that is more conclusion than discussion of ongoing constitutional controversies. A detailed index, which includes illustrations and cross references, lists people, court cases, places, media, organizations, and legislation and historical events. An appendix includes the full text of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and the title also includes a current bibliography. Most recent similar tides are limited to the full text of the founding documents. Three older titles--Ray Raphael's The U.S. Constitution (2017), Susan Low Bloch and Vicki C.Jackson's Federalism (2013), and John R. Vile's Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues, 1789-2010 (2010)--offer more detailed discussion. VERDICT Despite its limited coverage of amendments, this adds to the content in Bloch and Jackson's and Vile's works, and will interest general readers as well as students of political science, government, and teacher education.--Laurie Selwyn
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2022 A wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
http://www.libraryjournal.com/
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
"The Constitution Explained: A Guide for Every American." Library Journal, vol. 147, no. 8, Aug. 2022, pp. 123+. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A712725349/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=1d157707. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.
The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book: The History and Issues Explained. 2nd ed. By David L. Hudson. May 2023.448p. Visible Ink, $29.95 (9781578597826); e-book (9781578598243). 347.7326.
This clearly written guide reviews Supreme Court history, illuminates its procedures, highlights its "rich tapestry of legal decisions," and offers straightforward commentary on how this comparatively secretive branch of American government serves to balance the power of Congress and the presidency. Emphasis is on pressing contemporary issues, among them abortion rights, affirmative action, capital punishment, gun rights, religious freedom, social media, immigration, and laws enacted to counter domestic and international terrorism. Topics are introduced with boldface focus questions, like "in what decisions did the U.S. Supreme Court rule that a First Amendment right to burn an American flag exists?" and "how did the U.S. Supreme Court emphasize privacy protection for cell phone searches?" Answers are given in succinct, often playful layperson's language. Highlighted inset boxes provide detail on specific cases. This guide will make the Supreme Court and its workings accessible to secondary-school students and adults. In today's contentious political climate, it will help facilitate argumentation grounded in fact rather than emotion and is confidently recommended for public-library collections. --Art Lichtenstein
YA/C: This clever guide will make the workings of the Supreme Court accessible to high-school students. AL.
YA Recommendations
Adult titles recommended for teens are marked with the following symbols: YA, for books of general YA interest; YA/C, for books with particular curricular value; and YA/S, for books that will appeal most to teens with a special interest in a specific subject.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2023 American Library Association
http://www.ala.org/aboutala/offices/publishing/booklist/
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
Lichtenstein, Art. "The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book: The History and Issues Explained. 2nd ed." Booklist, vol. 119, no. 18, 15 May 2023, pp. 11+. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A751443038/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=0e86bee2. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.
Capital Punishment: A Documentary and Reference Guide.
By David L. Hudson.
2023. 318p. Bloomsbury Academic, $122 (9781440875779);
e-book (9798216170921). 345.730773.
The legitimacy of capital punishment is among the most provocative, emotionally laden debates in American history. This collection of primary source material presents significant essays, testimonies, speeches to Congress, landmark legislation, and pivotal Supreme Court opinions on the topic. The 53 documents selected for the collection bring focus to the history of the death penalty and its use, abuse, abandonment, and reinstatement by the Supreme Court, victims rights, moratoriums, and contemporary debate. Among the documents are Holden v. Minnesota (1890), in which the Supreme Court approves death by hanging, Powell v. Alabama (1932), whereby the court reverses the death sentence of the Scottsboro Boys, President Nixon's 1973 State of the Union address, in which he reaffirms his support of the death penalty, and a 2021 Innocence Project speech to the Ohio State Senate. Each document is introduced with capsule, explanatory information and followed by expert analysis. This nicely curated compilation presents its well-chosen selections in a single, convenient, highly accessible volume and is recommended for collections serving advanced secondary-level students and university undergraduates. --Art Lichtenstein
YA/C: This well-selected compilation of primary-source documents will serve advanced high-school researchers well. AL.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2023 American Library Association
http://www.ala.org/aboutala/offices/publishing/booklist/
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
Lichtenstein, Art. "Capital Punishment: A Documentary and Reference Guide." Booklist, vol. 120, no. 7-8, 1 Dec. 2023, p. 89. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A777512409/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=f23ac858. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.
HUDSON, David L, Jr., J.D. The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book: The History and Issues Explained. 2nd ed. 448p. Visible Ink. May 2023. pap. $29.95. ISBN 9781578597826.
Gr 9 Up--A fairly thorough history of the U.S. Supreme Court is provided in this volume by experienced law professor Hudson. Readers will learn the history of the court, information on some of the most well-known justices, and analyses of famous cases that have had far-reaching results. Cases are neatly divided by Constitutional amendments and then in chronological order. Race, abortion, and gun issues are presented in their own chapters, and the book concludes with Supreme Court trivia. Readers will also benefit from the currency of coverage, including the recent decisions of the Court, such as Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Though mostly comprehensive and readable, the questions themselves depend on a prior knowledge of a particular case, justice, or the United States Constitution; for instance, "How did the Warren Court increase the power of the police in street-level encounters?" or "What two attorneys argued on behalf of the Amistad before the U.S. Supreme Court?" Also, a lack of a glossary will require the uninitiated to consult a dictionary for phrases like prima facie and habeas corpus. In his glowing review of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Hudson glaringly omits Holmes's controversial stance in Buck v. Bell (with no reference to that decision). Otherwise sufficient and objective information is provided. VERDICT Given the organized format, excellent table of contents, and index, this volume will be a suitable addition to high school library reference collections; report writers will glean much.--Margaret Nunes
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2023 A wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/
Source Citation
Source Citation
MLA 9th Edition APA 7th Edition Chicago 17th Edition Harvard
Nunes, Margaret. "HUDSON, David L., Jr., J.D.: The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book: The History and Issues Explained." School Library Journal, vol. 69, no. 10, Oct. 2023, pp. 62+. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A766727668/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=cd5ccbc1. Accessed 16 Apr. 2024.