Or of the [Blog]

This paper a contribution to a symposium on blogs and the law examines the legal and constitutional status of blogs Specifically it offers three ways of looking at the relationship between blogs and the Press Clause and not incidentally of looking at the Press Clause itselfFirst drawing on recent historical work I suggest that we might view the Press Clause through either the free press or open press models that historically have applied to that provision Viewing the Press Clause through the open press model makes a home for blogs in the Press Clause but dilutes the content of the rights that might be available for blogs or anyone else under the Press Clause Second I suggest that we might view the Press Clause from a functional perspective protecting those activities that are at the heart of what we consider to be the social value of journalism This approach does manage to give some content to the press right and to extend it to journalists working in the old and new media alike but it fails to fully capture the qualities that we value in either the established press or the blogosphereFinally I argue that we might view the Press Clause specifically and the First Amendment generally in institutional terms identifying those speech institutions that contribute in unique and important ways to public discourse and granting them considerable autonomy to act according to the norms and practices that define and give value to each First Amendment institution Under this approach both the established news media and the blogosphere may find substantial protection under the Press Clause although the content of the rights available to each institution will be different based on the distinct nature of each institution I argue that this approach although in some ways it may appear to be the most radical of the three visions of the Press Clause I offer is both normatively attractive and closer to current First Amendment doctrine than one might assume Ultimately although my conclusions differ significantly from his I suggest that there may yet be life in the arguments made by Justice Stewart in his famous article on the Press Claus

Law in the Anthropocene Epoch

Humans and the effects of their activities now substantially influence the entire planet, including its oceans, climate, atmosphere, and lands. Human influence has become so large that earth scientists have debated whether to identify a new geologic time period: the Anthropocene. The Anthropocene will surely have substantial effects on society and economies, and law will be no exception. The Anthropocene is the product of the aggregation of billions of individual human actions, the impact of which is exponentially increasing because of growing technological advances and population. Humans will inevitably respond to the Anthropocene, if only to adapt to the significant changes in oceans, climate, biodiversity, and other critical functions upon which society depends. These responses will ineluctably lead to greater government involvement in a wide range of human activities and the constant updating of government laws and regulations to respond to new challenges. The result will put pressure on a wide range of legal doctrines in public and private law, including torts, property, constitutional, administrative, and criminal law. These changes will parallel similar revolutionary legal changes associated with industrialization and the development of a national economy in the United States in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Just as with those legal changes, the legal changes of the Anthropocene will put pressure on normative commitments at the heart of American law, including the classical liberal paradigm that government intrusion into individual action should be the exception, rather than the norm. Managing the impacts of these legal changes will be a key challenge for the legal system in the next century