NOTES & COMMENTS: The National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: The Supreme Court's Artful Yet Indecent Proposal Skip over navigation
LexisNexis® Browse Law Reviews and Treatises
Skip over navigation
Sign in with your lexis.com® ID to access the full text of this article.
-OR-
Order the full text of this article if you do not have a lexis.com® ID.
 
Price: 
US $22.00 (+ tax)
 
 

Copyright (c) 1999 New York Law School Journal of Human Rights
New York Law School Journal of Human Rights

NOTES & COMMENTS: The National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley: The Supreme Court's Artful Yet Indecent Proposal

1999

16 N.Y.L. Sch. J. Hum. Rts. 439

Author

Barry J. Heyman

Excerpt



Introduction
 
It is "the Supreme Court's obligation to maintain the Constitution as
something we the people can understand." 1

The federal government has been financially aiding American artists, organizations, and institutions through grants awarded by the National Endowment for the Arts ("NEA") since 1965. 2 In 1990, Congress mandated that the NEA take into consideration "general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public when awarding grants." 3 This provision, known as the decency clause ("Decency Clause"), 4 became statutory criteria for awarding federal grants to artists. As a result, four artist applicants were denied funding. They subsequently contested the constitutionality of the Decency Clause. 5 Prior to the amended statute, which included the Decency Clause, an advisory panel had recommended approval of the applicants' art projects. 6 However, based on the passage of this clause, the panel subsequently recommended disapproval, and funding was denied. 7 The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. 8 The Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that the amendment, on its face, impermissibly discriminated on the basis of viewpoint 9 and was void for vagueness under the First and Fifth Amendments. 10 On June 25, 1998, the Supreme Court reversed, and ruled that the Government can consider the "general standards of decency" when determining the propriety of a NEA grant. 11

This Comment will argue that by upholding both the First Amendment and the so-called "Decency Clause" in NEA v. ...
 
 
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.
Search Documents
 
eg., Environmental Insurance Coverage Under the Comprehensive General Liability Policy
 
 
 
 

Lexis® Web - The only search engine that delivers free web content specifically from legal sites validated by LexisNexis® attorney editors and includes tools for faster research and more relevant results.

 
LexisNexis Store
Research Now - Go to lexis.com
Connect the Dots - Free 1 hour webcast
Share. Network. Discover. - Go to LexisNexis Communities