Jones v. Schneiderman and the Right to Fight: Why New York's Ban on Mixed Martial Arts is Unconstitutional
| dc.contributor.author | Oaks, Katherine | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-06-16T22:24:03Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-06-16T22:24:03Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2014 | |
| dc.description.abstract | (12 Willamette Sports L.J., no. 1, 2014, at 50). This article analyzes a New York State ban on mixed martial arts (MMA) fighting in light of the case of Jones v. Schneiderman, a First Amendment challenge to the ban. The article gives the facts of the case, then describes a two-part test articulated in Spence v. Washington to determine whether conduct is “symbolic” enough to qualify as protected speech. The article gives background on MMA and the New York ban, as well as the development of rules to mitigate the violence of MMA fights. Next, the article analyzes MMA under the Spence test, arguing that MMA “is about tradition and fighting ability” and that because reasonable viewers understand this, the First Amendment protects live MMA fights as speech. The article also considers a claim that the New York ban violates due process due to its vagueness. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10177/5633 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.title | Jones v. Schneiderman and the Right to Fight: Why New York's Ban on Mixed Martial Arts is Unconstitutional | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |