Government Speech: An Introduction to a Constitutional Dialogue

By Day, David S. | South Dakota Law Review, Fall 2012 | Go to article overview

Government Speech: An Introduction to a Constitutional Dialogue


Day, David S., South Dakota Law Review


I. INTRODUCTION

It is a great pleasure to prepare this Introduction to the South Dakota Law Review's Symposium Issue. The Board of Editors selected the timely and controversial topic of the Government Speech Doctrine for this year's Symposium.

The Symposium was structured around two panels. The first panel focused on the Court's decision in Yohanns v. Livestock Marketing Association. (1) This is one of the important milestones in the development of the government speech doctrine. It also is a case deriving from events and lawyers in South Dakota. The trial in Johanns was held in federal District Court in Aberdeen, South Dakota before U.S. District Court Judge Charles Kornmann. The Symposium's first panel was composed of lawyers who tried the case. The panel's discussion traced the progression of Yohanns as it evolved (like almost all civil cases) over the course of several years.

The lawyer panelists were Scott Heidepriem, Ron Parsons, Jeff Cole, and myself. The audience was treated to continuing "debate" on the merits of Judge Kommann's ruling that the "speech" at issue was not government speech. The audience (especially the students) also gained valuable insight into the strategy decisions underlying the case. (2)

After a break, the second panel assembled. It took a broader focus on the present status of the government speech doctrine. The panelists included Professor Steven H. Goldberg (Pace Law School); Professor Helen Norton (University of Colorado); Professor Bob Bums (South Dakota State University); and Professor Donald Dahlin (The University of South Dakota). (3)

II. THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT SPEECH DOCTRINE

The government speech doctrine, as Justice John Stevens noted, is relatively newly "minted." (4) "New," of course, is not necessarily "good." Today, the government speech doctrine is a highly controversial analysis. Traditionally, "government speech" was considered the speech of the government (in the course of its business of governing). While there certainly could be controversy regarding the wisdom or soundness of the government's speech (for example, consider the 1960's Warren Commission Report on the Kennedy Assassination or the Meese Commission Report on Pornography in the 1980's), there seemed to be a general consensus that the government, in the course of its business, could use "government speech" to communicate and to inform the people about governmental policies. Such government speech seemed necessary and proper.

All this, however, changed. Today, we face the "new government speech" doctrine. The new government speech doctrine is conventionally traced back to the Rust v. Sullivan (5) decision, but Rust was not decided as a government speech case. I think the new government speech doctrine is traceable to Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez. (6) In Legal Services, Justice Kennedy suggested that Rust (which was not a government speech decision) should be read as a government speech decision. Legal Services constituted the point where the Rehnquist Court dramatically expanded the government speech concept. After Legal Services, government speech was composed of two types of speech: (1) the speech of government as the speaker; and (2) the speech of private speakers which carried the "government's message." These two types of speech are reflected in the chart below.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In the new government speech doctrine, government speech is not controlled by Free Speech principles. (7) After Johanns and Summum, the Government speech doctrine is subject only to the constraints of the political process. Accordingly, the cases in the new government speech doctrine apply only a deferential, rational basis standard of judicial review.

Without a counter-majoritarian (heightened) judicial review, there is concern that the government's use of its government speech "power" will create burdens or problems for the system of free expression. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Government Speech: An Introduction to a Constitutional Dialogue
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.