Content-neutral regulations are laws that regulate speech in a manner that is unrelated to the content or viewpoint expressed. This part of the course will discuss key Supreme Court cases involving content-neutral regulations of speech, including Schneider v. State and Kovacs v. Cooper, and examine issues around balancing tests versus rules-based approaches, less restrictive means requirements, and risks of underinclusion and viewpoint discrimination. The goal is to understand how the Court analyzes regulations that impact speech but are unrelated to the content or viewpoint expressed.

1. Content-Neutral Regulations
Introduction

2. Overview of 3 Parts of the Course
Speech
Content-Based Regulations Content-Neutral Regulations
Subject Matter Distinctions [Substance to come]
High Value Speech Low Value Speech Viewpoint
Discrimination
Brandenburg Viewpoint Discrimination
Viewpoint Discrimination

3. Basic Themes
• Schneider
– Environmental protection as purpose, speech-
restriction as method
• Invalid because other methods available
• Recall proportionality discussion: Are alternative methods
equally effective?
• Kovacs
– Content-neutral regulation has disparate impact
• First Amendment as a subsidy
– To the relatively poor
– To ideas distinctively associated with the relatively
poor?

4. Pervasive Issues
• Methodology: balancing versus rules
– Risk of singling out disfavored views lower here than
in connection with content-based rules, especially
with respect to low-value speech?
• Less restrictive means
– Costs in effectiveness
• Risk of underinclusion and viewpoint
discrimination (Metromedia and Martin v.
Struthers)