To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley

Law Dictionary

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
Font size

Constitutional Law Keyed to Chemerinsky

View this case and other resources at:
Bloomberg Law

Citation. 524 U.S. 569, 118 S. Ct. 2168, 141 L. Ed. 2d 500, 1998 U.S.

Brief Fact Summary. The Respondent, Finley (Respondent), was denied a federal grant to fund her performance art after the Petitioner, National Endowment for the Arts (Petitioner), determined that it might offend the general standards of decency.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. A law is facially valid as long as it does not suppress disfavored viewpoints.

Facts. The Petitioner is a federal agency that provides funding for the arts. Applications for these funds are reviewed by advisory panels that inform the Petitioner of their recommendations. The Petitioner has the ultimate authority to grant funding for projects, but cannot approve anything the advisory council rejects. In 1989, two provocative works prompted public controversy leading to the reevaluation of the project selection process. As a result, Congress adopted a law that made the Petitioner consider the “general standards of decency and respect for the diverse values of the American public.”

Issue. Is the new law invalid on its face and therefore a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech?
See More Course Videos

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following