Uma teoria da liberdade de expressão como democracia participatória: considerações a partir de Robert Post e James Weinstein
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2023.e94923Palavras-chave:
Liberdade de expressão, Autogoverno democrático, Democracia participativa, Robert Post, James WeinsteinResumo
O presente trabalho trata da proteção constitucional à liberdade de expressão. Mais especificamente, a partir da participatory theory de Robert Post e James Weinstein. Objetiva-se apresentar a teoria dos autores, e, para tanto, no primeiro item se apresenta a teoria de Alexander Meiklejohn, que primeiro sistematizou a relação entre a concretização do autogoverno democrático e a proteção estatal do direito de fala. Após, expõe-se a teoria de Robert Post e James Weinstein, a qual liga a defesa do direito individual de expressão à concretização do autogoverno democrático, justificando-a com base na ação política dos falantes no lugar do benefício aos ouvintes. Por fim, a partir de Post e Weinstein, reitera-se o ponto central da participatory theory contra a ideia dominante da liberdade de expressão centrada na autonomia.
Referências
BAKER, Edwin C. Is democracy a sound basis for a free speech principle? Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 515-529, maio 2011. Disponível em: <http://www.virginialawreview.org/volumes/content/democracy-sound-basis-free-speech-principle>. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
BAKER, Edwin. Autonomy and free speech. Constitutional Commentary, v. 27, p. 251-282, outubro 2011. Disponível em: <https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/163434/2-Baker-272-AutonomyAndFreeSpeech3.pdf;sequence=1>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
BAKER, Edwin. Steve Shiffrin: friend and scholar. Loyola Law Review, v. 41, p. 49-51, set. 2007. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2596&context=llr>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
BLASI, Vincent. Democratic Participation and the Freedom of Speech: A Response to Post and Weinstein. Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 531- 540, 2011. Disponível em: <http://www.virginialawreview.org/volumes/content/democratic-participation-and-freedom-speech-response-post-and-weinstein>. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
BRENNAN, William J. The Supreme Court and the Meiklejohn Interpretation of the First Amendment. Harvard Law Review, v. 79, n. 1, p. 1-20, nov. 1965.
FISS, Owen M., Free Speech and Social Structure. Iowa Law Review, p. 1405-1425, 1986. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/1210>. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
FISS, Owen. The irony of free speech. Harvard University Press, 1998.
JARYMOWICZ, Thomas. Robert Post’s theory of freedom of speech: A critique of the reductive conception of political liberty. Philosophy & Social Criticism, v. 40, n.1, p. 107–123, jan. 2014.
LEE, C.; FERGUSON, B.; EARLEY, D. After Citizens United: the story in the states. New York: Brennan Center, 2014. Disponível em: <https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/after-citizens-united-story-states>. Acesso em: 07 jan. 2019.
MACEDO JÚNIOR, Ronaldo Porto. Liberdade de expressão: que lições devemos aprender da experiência americana? Revista Direito GV, v. 13, n. 1, p. 274-302, mai. 2017. Disponível em: <http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/revdireitogv/article/view/68919>. Acesso em: 07 Jul. 2018.
MEIKLEJOHN, Alexander. Free Speech and Its Relation to Self-Government. New York: Harper Brothers Publishers, 1948.
MEIKLEJOHN, Alexander. The first amendment is an absolute. The Supreme Court Review, v. 1961, p. 245-266, 1961. Disponível em: <https://www.jstor.org/stable/3108719?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Participatory Democracy as a Theory of Free Speech: a reply. Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 617-632, maio 2011. Disponível em: <http://www.virginialawreview.org/volumes/content/participatory-democracy-theory-free-speech-reply>. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
POST, Robert. Theorizing Disagreement: Reconceiving the Relationship Between Law and Politics. California Law Review, v. 98, n. 4, p. 1319-1350, agosto 2010. Disponível em: <https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1079&context=californialawreview>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. A progressive perspective on freedom of speech. In: BALKIN, Jack M; SIEGEL, Reva B. The Constitution in 2020. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
POST, Robert C. Meiklejohn's Mistake: Individual Autonomy and the Reform of Public Discourse. University of Colorado Law Review, p. 1109-1137, 1993. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/203/>. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
POST, Robert. et al. Citizens Divided. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: Harvard University Press, 2014
POST, Robert. The Constitutional Concept of Public Discourse: Outrageous Opinion, Democratic Deliberation, and Hustler Magazine v. Falwell. Harvard Law Review, v. 103, n. 3, jan. 1990. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/210/>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Racist Speech, Democracy, and the First Amendment. William and Mary Law Review, v. 32, n. 2, jan. 1991, p. 267-327. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1207&context=fss_papers>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Managing Deliberation: The Quandary of Democratic Dialogue. Ethics, v. 103, jul. 1993, p. 654-678. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/204/>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Recuperating First Amendment Doctrine. Stanford Law Review, v. 47, jul. 1995, p. 1249-1281. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/200/>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Community and the First Amendment. Arizona State Law Journal, v. 29, jan.1997, p. 473-484. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/196/>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Hate Speech. In: HARE, Ivan; WEINSTEN, James. Extreme Speech and Democracy. Oxford Scholarship Online, 2009. Disponível em: <http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199548781.001.0001/acprof-9780199548781>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
POST, Robert. Teorizing Disagreement: Reconceiving the Relationship between Law and Politics. California Law Review, v. 98, n. 4, p. 1319-1350, agosto 2010. Disponível em: <https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/4644/>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
PONTES, André Luiz Marcondes. Dworkin, Rawls e o método do equilíbrio reflexivo. In JÚNIOR, Ronaldo Porto Macedo. Teoria do Direito Contemporânea: autores e temas. Curitiba: Juruá, 2017.
SHIFFRIN, Seana Valentine. Methodology in free speech theory. Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 549-558, maio 2011.
SHIFFRIN, Seana V. A Thinker-Based Approach to Freedom of Speech. Constitutional Commentary, v. 27, n. 2, p. 283-307, 2011. Disponível em: <https://philpapers.org/rec/SHIATA>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
SHIFFRIN, Steven. Dissent, Democratic Participation, and First Amendment Methodology. Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 559-565, maio 2011. Disponível em: <https://www.jstor.org/stable/41261522?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
SCANLON, T. M. Why not base free speech on autonomy or democracy? Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 541-548, maio 2011a. Disponível em: <http://www.virginialawreview.org/volumes/content/why-not-base-free-speech-autonomy-or-democracy>. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
SCANLON, T. M. Comment on Bakers Autonomy and Free Speech. Constitutional Commentary, v. 27, p. 319-325, out. 2011b. Disponível em: <https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2080&context=concomm>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
SCHAUER, Frederick. Must Speech Be Special? Northwestern University Law Review, v. 79, n. 5, 1983. Disponível em: <https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/878>. Acesso em: 07 Jul. 2018.
VOLOKH, Eugene. The trouble with public discourse as a limitation on free speech rights. Virginia Law Review. v. 97, n. 3, p. 567- 594, abril 2011. Disponível em: <http://virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/567.pdf>. Acesso em: 07 jan. 2019.
VOLOKH, Eugene. In defense of the Marketplace of Ideas / Search for Truth as a Theory of Free Speech protection. Virginia Law Review. v. 97, n. 3, p. 595-602, abril 2011. Disponível em: <http://virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/567.pdf>. Acesso em: 07 jan. 2019.
WEINSTEIN, James. Participatory democracy as the central value of American free speech doctrine. Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 491-514, 2011. Disponível em: <https://web.law.asu.edu/Portals/31/Weinstein_UVA_May_2011.pdf>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
WEINSTEIN, James. Participatory democracy as the central value of American free speech doctrine: a reply. Virginia Law Review, v. 97, n. 3, p. 633-680, 2011. Disponível em: <http://www.virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/633_0.pdf>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019
WEINSTEIN, James. Seana Shiffrin's Thinker-Based Theory of Free Speech: Elegant and Insightful, But Will It Work in Practice? Constitutional Commentary, v. 27, p. 385-397, out. 2011. Disponível em: <https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1467&context=concomm>. Acesso em: 05 jan. 2019.
WEINSTEIN, James. Hate Speech Bans, Democracy and Political Legitimacy. Constitutional Commentary, v. 32, n. 3 p. 527-583, outono 2017. Disponível em: <https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/191522>. Acesso em: 07 jan. 2019.
WEINSTEIN, James. Formal equality, formal autonomy, and political legitimacy: a Response to Ed Baker. West Virginia Law Review, v. 115, n. 3 p. 29-38, out 2012. Disponível em: <https://wvlawreview.wvu.edu/files/d/b3d759aa-d6ca-4931-9a78-8fe2b5ac86b6/weinstein.pdf>. Acesso em: 07 jan. 2019.
WILLIAMS, Susan H. Democracy Freedom of Speech and Feminist Theory. A Response to Post and Weinstein.Virginia Law Review, v. 97, p. 603-616, 2011. Disponível em: <https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/1322/>. Acesso em: 07 jan. 2019.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
This obra is licensed under a Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional
