Washington Law Review


In Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York Crime Victims Board, the Supreme Court held that a statute, New York's "Son of Sam" law, that allowed crime victims to reach the proceeds of their victimizers' media reenactments of the criminals' wrongful acts violated the First Amendment. By invalidating the statute, the Supreme Court eliminated the only presently available means to prevent criminals from profiting from their crimes and exploiting their victims. This Comment examines the origins of this problem and proposes that courts use restitutions common law doctrines to prevent criminals who sell their stories from profiting at the expense of their victims' suffering.

First Page