in support of free expression
The information presented here by the National
Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) may be freely redistributed in its entirety,
provided that readers are informed that the information was obtained from
NCAC's World Wide Web site and that credit is given to the appropriate source
of whatever information is used. Permission is expressly granted for the information
obtained to be made available for file transfer from installations offering
unrestricted anonymous file transfer on the Internet. Information found here
may not be sold for profit or incorporated in commercial documents without
the written permission from the National Coalition Against Censorship.
©Copyright 2005 NCAC
WEB DESIGN
Jeanne Criscola Criscola Design
free speech first amendment censorship
|
|
|
|
|
Serra
was commissioned by the federal government to
create a sculpture for the plaza next to a federal
office complex in lower Manhattan. Serra’s
work was “site-specific;” the sculpture
would only be meaningful when displayed in the
particular location for which it was created.
The federal government bought the sculpture (“Tilted
Ark”), signing a contract with Serra stating
that all of his work produced under the contract
would become the property of the U.S. After years
of criticism from community residents and office
workers about the sculpture’s obstruction
of the plaza and its unappealing appearance, the
government decided to relocate the sculpture from
the federal office complex. Government officials
claimed that the decision rested on the sculpture’s
interference with employees’ and residents’
use of the plaza, not its aesthetic value. Serra
then filed a lawsuit challenging the government’s
decision to relocate the sculpture.
The Court ruled that the First Amendment is limited
in this case, where the artistic expression belongs
to the government rather than a private individual.
The government here was not subsidizing the creation
of artworks, but was an actual purchaser and owner
of the artwork in issue.
The Court found:
| • |
The
artist gave up his free speech rights in his
sculpture when he sold it to the government; |
| • |
Even
if the artist retained some First Amendment
interest in the continued display of the sculpture,
removal of the sculpture was a permissible
time, place, and manner restriction; and, |
| • |
Even
if the government’s decision to move
the sculpture was based on the sculpture’s
lack of aesthetic appeal, i.e. because the
sculpture was ugly, its decision was permissible. |
The
Court noted that, had Serra shown that the government
removed the sculpture to condemn a political point
of view, he would have had a better chance of
winning, but Serra himself could not identify
any particular message conveyed by Tilted Ark.
The Court concluded that under the First Amendment
there is no right for artists to have a work of
art sold to the government permanently displayed
at the intended location. |
|
| These
materials are not intended, and should not be used, as
legal advice. They necessarily contain generalizations
that are not applicable in all jurisdictions or circumstances.
Moreover, court decisions may be superceded by subsequent
rulings, and may be subject to alternative interpretations.
Corrections, clarification, and additions are welcome.
Please send to ncac@ncac.org. |
|
Action Alerts
» National
» Eastern
» Central
» Mountain
» Pacific
» email alert sign-up
» report censorship!
|
