Bibliography: NEA v. Finley

Freedom of Expression

at the National Endowment for the Arts

An interdisciplinary education project partially funded by the American Bar Association, Commission on College and University Legal Studies through the ABA Fund for Justice and Education

BIBLIOGRAPHY: NEA v. Finley
Site Table of Contents

This bibliography includes only print materials (books and articles) on the U.S. Supreme Court decision, NEA v. Finley, published after 6/25/98 (the date of the decision). It will be updated regularly as books and journal articles on the decision are published. If you notice that important materials are missing, please let me know.

For comprehensive print resources on government funding of the arts, see Bibliography: Books and Bibliography: Articles . (All material on NEA v. Finley is also included in these two comprehensive Bibliographies.)
For more wide-ranging materials on free speech, please see On-Line Resources.

Alexander, Jane. Command Performance: An Actress in the Theater of Politics. New York: Public Affairs, 2000.

Allison, Gary D. "The Cultural War over NEA funding: Illogical Statutory Deconstruction Erodes Expressive Freedom." Tulsa law Journal 34 (Winter 1999), 233-264.

Armbrust, Roger. "Supreme Court Rebuffs Artist 8-1." Back Stage 39 (July 3, 1998), 1.

"Art, Distribution & the State: Perspectives on the National Endowment for the Arts." Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 17 (1999), 705-748. [Symposium Participants: Amy Schwartzman, John Tuskey, Robert W. Peters, Hope O'Keefe, Roberto Bedoya, David Cole, Marci Hamilton]

"Art for the Masses: Decency test OK for awarding grants." ABA Journal 84 (August, 1998), 46.

Backer, Larry Cata. "Symposium: A Cobler's Court, A Practitioner's Court: The Rehnquist Court Finds Its 'Groove.'" Tulsa Law Journal 34 (Winter 1999), 347-365. [NEA v. Finley, n. 97]

Bezanson, Randall P. "The Government Speech Forum: Forbes and Finley and Government Speech Selection Judgments." Iowa Law Review 83 (August 1998), 953-994.

Bloom, Lackland H., Jr. "NEA v. Finley: A Decision in Search of a Rationale." Washington University Law Quarterly 77 (Spring 1999), 1-51.

Burnett, David Lawrence. "Casenote: First Amendment & 20 U.S.C. 954." Seton Hall Constitutional Journal 9 (Fall 1998), 173-212.

Brustein, Robert. "Sex, Art, and the Supreme Court." The New Republic (October 5, 1998), 30.

Carr, C. "Gross indecency." The Village Voice (July 7, 1998), p. 59.

Casarez, Nicole B. "Public Forums, Selective Subsidies, and Shifting Standards of Viewpoint Discrimination." Albany Law Review 64 (2000), 501-581.

Cassens, Debra. "A constitutional siesta." ABA Journal (September 1998), pp. 38-39.

Chemerinsky, Erwin. "Content Neutrality as a Central Problem of Freedom of Speech: Problems in the Supreme Court's Application." Southern California Law Review 74 (2000), 49-64.

Choi, Alice. "National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: A Dispute over the 'Decency and Respect' Provision." Akron Law Review 32:2 (1999), 327-350.

Cleary, Eric J. "In Finley's Wake: Forging a Viable First Amendment Approach to the Government's Subsidization of the Arts." Fordham Law Review 68 (December, 1999), 965-1010.

Cockburn, Alexander. "Like coal dust, like chocolate." The Nation (July 20, 1998), p. 8.

Cohen, Cecilia. "An Endangered Species? Artistic Grants as a Vehicle for the Evolution of Entitlements Law." Syracuse Law Review 49 (1999), 1277-1301.

Collignon, Brian R. "Taking Into Consideration the 'Decency Clause.'" Washburn Law Journal 38 (Summer, 1999), 929-947.

Cunnane, Kristine M. "Maintaining Viewpoint Neutrality for the NEA: National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley." Connecticut Law Review 31 (summer 1999), 1445-1483.

Danto, Arthur C. "Art for speech's sake."The Nation (July 20, 1998), p. 4.

D'Entremont, James. "Indecent Decision." The Guide (August 1998).

Devlin, Gary E. "NEA v. Finley: Explicating the Rocky Relationship between the Government and the Arts." Pepperdine Law Review 27 (2000), 345-376.

Dienes, C. Thomas. "National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley." Legal Times (July 13, 1998), p. S33.

Dienes, C. Thomas. "On Speech Issues, Court Speaks in Many Tongues One Message Loud and Clear: First Amendment a Work in Progress." New Jersey Law Journal (August 24, 1998), p. S-11.

Dorf, Michael C. "Foreward: The Limits of Socratic Deliberation." Harvard Law Review 112 (November 1998), 4-83 [see 69 n. 374].

Edmundson, Mark. "Art and Imperium: Art and Government Policy." The Nation 266 (June 29, 1998), 25.

Eisenberg, Arthur N. "The Brooklyn Museum Controversy and the Issue of Government-funded Expression." Brooklyn Law Review 66 (2000), 275-308.

"Federal statute requiring National Endowment for the Arts to consider 'decency' and 'respect' for American 'values' when selecting grant recipients is not unconstitutional 'on its face.'" Entertainment Law Reporter 20 (August 1998).

Guggenheim, Jack Achiezer. “The Evolution of Chutzpah as a Legal Term: The Chutzpah championship, Chutzpah Award, Chutzpah doctrine, and Now, the Supreme Court.” Kentucky Law Journal 87 (1998/1999), pp. 417- 438 [see Sec. VIII on NEA v. Finley]

Hartigan, Patti. "What would NEA say about funding the Starr report?" The Boston Globe (September 18, 1998), D3.

Heins, Marjorie. Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars. New York: The New Press, 1998. [See especially Chapter 6, 1998 Revised Edition]

Heyman, Barry J. "The National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: The Supreme Court's Artful Yet Indecent Proposal." New York Law School Journal of Human Rights 16 (1999), 439-473.

Heyman, Steven J. "State-Supported Speech." Wisconsin Law Review 1999 (1999), 1119-1198.

Hofland, Constance. "Constitutional Law - First Amendment - Freedom of Speech: The National Endowment for the Arts Can Require Consideration of 'Decency and Respect' in Funding Decisions without Abridging Freedom of Speech." North Dakota Law Review 75 (1999), 893-920.

Ita, Amy Ruth. "Censorial Community Values: An Unconstitutional Trend in Arts Funding and Access." Ohio State Law Journal 61 (2000), 1725-1753.

James, Bernard. "In Focus: Supreme Court Review." The National Law Journal (August 10, 1998), B15.

Kamenshine, Robert D. "Reflections on Coerced Expression." Land and Water Law Review 34 (1999), 101.

Kisliuk, Bill. "Ninth Circuit Reversal Rate Gets Closer to Normal." The Recorder (June 26, 1998), p. 1.

Kline, Matthew Thomas. “FIRST AMENDMENT: 1. Limiting Internet Access: a) Public Libraries: mainstream Loudoun v. Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library.” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 14 (199), 347-370. [See Section II.A. on NEA v. Finley]

Kowalski, Karen M. "National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: Painting a Grim Picture for Federally-Funded Art." DePaul Law Review 49 (Fall 1999), 217-273.

McCarter, Jeremy. “Arts and Craft: the NEA’s dubious survival strategy.” The New Republic (February 8, 1999), p. 17.

McKoy, Andrea K. "Casenote: National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: First Amendment Free speech No Longer Guaranteed for the Arts." Mercer Law Review 50 (Spring 1999), 791-808.

Mellina, Linda A. "Decency v. The Arts: And The Winner Is . . . the National Endowment for the Arts?" Seton Hall Law Review 29 (1999): 1513-1542.

Meyer, Richard. "'Have You Heard the One about the Lesbian Who Goes to the Supreme Court?': Holly Hughes and the Case Against Censorship." Theatre Journal 52 (2000), 543-552.

Miller, Tim. "Supreme Court ruling assaults artistic freedom." Harvard Gay & Lesbian Review 5 (Fall 1998), 4.

"NEA Can Use 'Decency' Standard in Making Grants." The National Law Journal (July 13, 1998), p. B13.

"NEA 'Decency Law' Held Constitutional." The Legal Intelligencer (June 26, 1998), p. 5.

O'Neill, Kevin Francis. "A First Amendment Compass: Navigating the Speech Clause with a Five-Step Analytical Framework." Southwestern University Law Review 29 (2000), 223-300.

Pally, Marcia. "'Decency' in the Arts." Tikkun 6 (November 1, 1998), p. 58.

Patten, Neil C. "The Politics of Art and the Irony of Politics: How the Supreme Court, Congress, the NEA, and Karen Finley Misunderstand Art and Law in National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley." Houston Law Review 37 (Summer 2000), 559-602.

Putnam, Cara. "National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: the Supreme Court Missed an Opportunity to Clarify the Role of the NEA in Funding the Arts: Are the Grants a Propperty Right or an Award?" George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal 9:2 (Summer 1999), 237-282.

Rapp, Christopher. "Chocoholic." National Review (July 20, 1998), p. 35.

Ray, Elizabeth Megan. "'I May Not Know Art, but I Know what I'll Pay For': the Government's Role in Arts Funding following National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley." University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 2 (March 2000), 497-528.

Richardson, L. Anita. "U.S. Supreme Court trends." Social Education (October 1998), p. 371-76.

Rosenfield, Adam D. "A Survey of Recent Developments in the Law IV. Constitutional Law." William Mitchell Law Review 25 (1999) 1065-1075. [NEA: Section B]

Rosenfeld, Mordecai. "A Bittersweet Controversy." New York Law Journal (September 2, 1998), p. 2.

Rosenthal, Jay. "Music industry should rally against NEA ruling." Billboard (August 8, 1998), p. 4.

Safire, William. "Minding The Court's Language." New York Times Magazine (August 16, 1998), 20.

Schauer, Frederick. "Comment: Principles, Institutions, and the First Amendment." Harvard Law Review 112 (November, 1998), 84-120. [NEA v. Finley illustrates institutional differentiation in recent free speech analysis]

Schiller, Reuel E. "Free Speech and Expertise: Administrative Censorship and the Birth of the Modfern First Amendment." Virginia Law Review 86 (February, 2000), 1-102. [brief mention of NEA, n. 544]

Schmaltz, Kimberly A. "National Endowment For The Arts v. Finley: Viewpoint Discrimination Masked As The Government's Foray Into The Realm of Art Patron." Northern Kentucky Law Review 26:2 (Summer 1999), 337-356.

Stream, Carol. "Raunchy art ruled unprotected." Christianity Today (August 10, 1998), p. 15.

Sullivan, Kathleen M. "Behind the Crimson Curtain." New York Review of Books (October 8, 1998), pp. 15-18. [Brief discussion of NEA v. Finley, p. 16]

Taft, Gloria F. "National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: Challenging the Facial Challenge." Campbell Law Review 21:1 (Winter, 1998), 81-97.

Taylor, Stuart, Jr. "Art and decency: The case for muddled moderation." National Journal (July 4, 1998), pp. 1552-1553.

The identical article has been published under different titles in these publications:

"More of O'Connor's Muddled Moderation; Majority Opinion on Endowment for Arts Placates Both Sides," Fulton County Daily Report (July 8, 1998).

"Savoring Judicial Fudge," New York Law Journal (July 6, 1998), p. 2.

"The High Court Wades into the Culture Wars," The Connecticut Law Tribune (July 6, 1998).

Tofte, Brenda L. "'Baby It's Cold Outside:' The Chilling Effect of the Decency Clause on the Arts in the Aftermath of National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley." Hamline Law Review 22:1 (Fall 1998), 303-352.

Tushnet, Mark. “The Possibilities of Comparative Constitutional Law.” Yale law Journal 108 (April 1999), 1225-1309 [see especially, Sec. III.A.]

Wagner, David. "Supreme Court scorecard." Insight on the News (July 27, 1998), pp. 18-20.

Walther, Harold B. "National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: Sinking Deeper into the Abyss of the Supreme Court's Unintelligible Modern Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine." Maryland Law Review 59 (2000), 225-251.

Warren, Sarah F. "Art: To Fund or Not to Fund? That is Still the Question." Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 19 (2001), 149-181.

Whelan, Victoria Rebecca. "Governmental Benefits Conditioned on the Relinquishment of Constitutional Rights." Suffolk Journal of Trial & Appellate Advocacy 5 (2000), 225-243.

Will, George F. "The Art of Funding." Newsweek (July 6, 1998), p. 78.

Zelinsky, Edward A. "Are Tax 'Benefits' Constitutionally Equivalent to Direct Expenditures?" Harvard Law Review 112 (December 1998), 379-433. [Discussion of NEA v. Finley, 427-430]

Click here for Bibliography: Books and Bibliography: Articles: comprehensive print bibliographies on government funding of the arts. (All materials on NEA v. Finley are also included in these comprehensive bibliographies.)

This site developed and maintained by Julie Van Camp, Professor of Philosophy,
California State University, Long Beach.

Your comments, questions, and suggestions are welcome:e-mail: jvancamp@csulb.edu

1250 Bellflower Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 90840-2408
Office Phone/Voice Mail: (562) 985-5854
Department Fax: (562) 985-7135

Permission is hereby given to print, download, and reproduce these materials for educational, personal, or scholarly purposes, but only if the copyright notice and this permission notice are reprinted in full with each copy. This material may not be sold or otherwise used for commercial purposes.

Nothing in this material should be considered legal advice. If you have a legal problem, you should consult with experienced legal counsel. The views here are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Bar Association, California State University, or the National Endowment for the Arts.

Last updated: July 4, 2005