Cited as a source by the ProJo's PolitiFact column, Professor Jared Goldstein weighs in on a Rhode Island law that appears to make lying a misdemeanor.

Upcoming Events

Commencement

Cyber Threats and Cyber Realities

Commencement

Cyber Threats and Cyber Realities

Pro Bono Collaborative Cocktail Reception
MAY
30
5:30 pm - 7:00 pm
Citizens Plaza Rotunda
Philadelphia Area Law Alumni Reception
JUN
06
5:30 pm - 7:00 pm
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Open House for Admitted Students
JUN
10
9:15 am - 1:30 pm
RWU Law, Ten Metacom Avenue, Bristol, RI 02809
Law Alumni Association Breakfast/School of Law 20th Anniversary Celebration Kick-off
JUN
13
7:45 am - 9:15 am
Rhode Island Convention Center, First Floor West Lobby, Providence
Bridging The Gap: Restart and Recharge Your Legal Career
JUN
20
8:30 am - 4:00 pm
RWU School of Law

Dean’s Blog

05/24/2013
I often use this blog to talk about the amazing array of experiential learning opportunities that RWU Law is able to offer as the only law school in Rhode Island. But as we approach our 20th...


Meet Our Oil Spill Experts

Archives

Newsroom

Goldstein on 'Anti-Lying' Law

Cited as a source by the ProJo's PolitiFact column, Professor Jared Goldstein weighs in on a Rhode Island law that appears to make lying a misdemeanor.

From the PROVIDENCE JOURNAL: "You are now, mostly, free to lie on the Internet" by C. EUGENE EMERY JR. JOURNAL STAFF WRITER
   
June 25, 2012: [...] previously, you could have faced misdemeanor charges in Rhode Island, if you believe state Rep. Christopher Blazejewski, a Providence Democrat. On June 12, he told the Rhode Island House that it was illegal to transmit a lie on the Internet, on radio, on TV, or over the phone about anything.

Professor Jared Goldstein[...] Jared Goldstein, a law professor at Roger Williams University School of Law, said the plain language of the law did “indeed appear to make it a crime to knowingly or intentionally send any false information over the Internet, without any limitation on the context or subject matter. If read literally, the language would seem to cover giving false information on a dating site. Or lying to a friend in an e-mail message. Or maybe even clicking ‘Like’ for a friend’s photo that you don’t really like.

“If the provision is read in that literal way,” he said, “it would almost certainly be unconstitutionally overbroad because it would prohibit a huge amount of constitutionally-protected speech. Even if it is not read that way, but construed narrowly to cover only false information that can constitutionally be prohibited, the law may still be unconstitutionally vague, because it doesn’t clearly tell the public what is prohibited.” [...]

For full story, click here.