This Comment argues that RAFHA, as currently written, cannot stand in light of First Amendment jurisprudence. Part I reviews the history and development of relevant free speech case law and restrictions on expression, including the recent trend in the states of passing legislation similar to RAFHA. Part II assesses the Act’s constitutionality against this background. First, Part II contends that the statute is a content-based restriction of free speech and is thus subject to strict scrutiny. Second, even if deemed content neutral, the Act could not survive the courts’ intermediate scrutiny. Finally, this Comment reasons that even if able to survive the above challenges, the Act is still unconstitutional under First Amendment case law because it provides for standardless prior restraint. This Comment concludes that RAFHA is an unconstitutional regulation of speech and should be challenged in court.
Cornwell, Andrea. "Final Salute to Lost Soldiers: Preserving the Freedom of Speech at Military Funerals." American University Law Review 56, no. 5 (June 2007):1329-1374.