To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter examines constitutional theory and doctrine as applied to emerging government regulations of video image capture and proposes a framework that will promote free speech to the fullest extent possible without facilitating unnecessary intrusions into legitimate privacy interests.
This chapter examines how the ethics of undercover investigations in the field of journalism have varied considerably over history, and are contextually driven. It is not true that the practice has always been viewed as dubious, nor is it accurate to say that it is uniformly celebrated and accepted.
This chapter reports on the findings of a number of original studies designed to test the public acceptance of undercover investigations. We study public attitudes about investigations generally and in a variety of specific contexts.
Undercover investigators have been celebrated as critical conduits of political speech and essential protectors of transparency. They have also been derided as intrusive and spy-like, inconsistent with private property rights, and morally or ethically questionable. In Truth and Transparency, Alan K. Chen and Justin Marceau rigorously examine this duality and seek to provide a socio-legal context for understanding these varying views. The book concretely deﬁnes undercover investigations, distinguishes the practice from investigative journalism and whistleblowing, and provides a comprehensive legal history. Chapters explore the public need for investigations and the rights of investigators, paying close attention to the types of investigations that fall beyond the scope of constitutional protection. The book also provides concrete empirical evidence of the broad, bipartisan support for undercover investigations and champions the practice as an essential com-ponent of the transparency our democracy needs to thrive.
The American system of criminal law and punishment is racist, classist, destructive, and ineffective in preventing harm and promoting justice. This isn’t an extreme view, nor is it a secret. Indeed, more than half of the country has concluded that aspects of our system of punishment are unfair according to recent polling. Nonetheless, many Americans reflexively seek out punitive interventions in response to vexing social problems. We operate in a realm of dissonance recognizing in the abstract the dysfunction and cruelty of the system, but also endorse criminal interventions in support of the social goals we support. These complicated, contradictory views about the system of law, policing, and imprisonment have been, until quite recently, relatively unexamined. This book encourages reflection on these complex issues of progressive carceralism.
Many animal lawyers react to critiques of carceral animal law by contending that punishment is no longer a priority, and that there are only but a handful of anecdotes about over-charging. One might listen to animal lawyers who support criminal interventions and conclude that incarceration is no longer a priority. But a critique of incarceration alone was never the point, and such a framing would actually let the movement off too easy. Prosecutions that do not result in sentences of imprisonment, under this logic, are examples of the merciful progression of animal law. This chapter focuses attention on the other-than-incarceration efforts that might be incorrectly conflated with leniency and just outcomes by animal advocates. Recognizing that for many of our readers, it will sound ridiculous to suggest that police interventions that do not lead to incarceration can be an over-reaction to animal crimes. Thus, a substantial portion of the chapter is comprised of short vignettes that describe the role of police in animal protection efforts that do not involve incarceration. These examples are not exhaustive, but they provide a foundation for thinking about how policing and prosecution that does not result in incarceration or even a conviction can be affirmatively bad for animals.