Supreme court of the united states

COMMENT: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-WHEN RIGHTS COLLIDE: BUFFER ZONES AND ABORTION CLINICS-MADSEN V. WOMEN'S HEALTH CTR., INC., 114 S. Ct. 2516 (1994)., 22 Fla. St. U.L. Rev. 695 (1995)

1340.

ARTICLE: ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT-HELD INFORMATION IN THE COMPUTER AGE: APPLYING LEGAL DOCTRINE TO EMERGING TECHNOLOGY, 20 Fla. St. U.L. Rev. 543 (1993)

1341.

CASE NOTE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW -- FIRST AMENDMENT -- FREEDOM OF THE PRESS -- THE PRESS' RIGHT OF ACCESS TO TRIALS VERSUS THE VICTIM'S INTEREST IN TESTIFYING PRIVATELY -- GLOBE NEWSPAPER CO. V. SUPERIOR COURT, U.S. , 102 S. Ct. 2613 (1982), 11 Fla. St. U.L. Rev. 487 (1983)

1342.

ARTICLE: The Food and Drug Administration's Regulation of Prescription Drug Manufacturer Speech: A First Amendment Analysis, 58 Food Drug L.J. 365 (2003)

1343.

ARTICLE: Prior Restraints and Intellectual Property: The Clash between Intellectual Property and the First Amendment from an Economic Perspective, 12 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1 (2001)

1344.

NOTE: What's Wrong with this Picture? When the Lanham Act Clashes with Artistic Expression, 7 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 821 (1997)

1345.

ESSAY: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS: IN DEFENSE OF THE MERITS, 76 Fordham L. Rev. 33 (2007)

76 Fordham L. Rev. 33 p.33

1346.

NOTE: WHERE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES CONVERGE: DISCRIMINATORY MEDIA ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, 75 Fordham L. Rev. 253 (2006)

75 Fordham L. Rev. 253 p.253

1347.

NOTE: NATIONAL SECURITY VERSUS DEFENSE COUNSEL'S "NEED TO KNOW": AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD FOR RESOLVING THE TENSION, 73 Fordham L. Rev. 1941 (2005)

73 Fordham L. Rev. 1941 p.1941

1348.

ARTICLE: IS THERE A RIGHT TO HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY? ONE VIEW OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, 73 Fordham L. Rev. 297 (2004)

73 Fordham L. Rev. 297 p.297

1349.