Cheryl Preston: Difference between revisions
Dana Silvia (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
-Category:People; +Category:Academia using HotCat |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|caricature = Cheryl_PrestonCaricature.jpg | |caricature = Cheryl_PrestonCaricature.jpg | ||
|born = | |born = | ||
|country = | |country = USA | ||
|email = prestonc@lawgate.byu.edu | |email = prestonc@lawgate.byu.edu | ||
|website = | |website = | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Cheryl Bailey Preston''' is a Law Professor at Brigham Young University | '''Cheryl Bailey Preston''' is a Law Professor at Brigham Young University, and is recognized as an expert in Internet regulations. | ||
She is involved in writing about online pornography issues and, along with an NGO called CP80.org, in creating solutions that combine consumer choice with legislation. | |||
Ms. Preston publishes articles on the relation between law and religion, and law and popular cultural images. | |||
Prior to being a part of Brigham Young University, she | Prior to being a part of Brigham Young University, she was a law clerk in United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.<ref>[http://www.law2.byu.edu/faculty/profiles2009/profile_fancy.php?id=27 Faculty Profile]</ref> | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
[[Category:Academia]] | |||
Latest revision as of 19:09, 20 May 2021
 |
 |
| Country: | USA |
| Email: | prestonc@lawgate.byu.edu |
Cheryl Bailey Preston is a Law Professor at Brigham Young University, and is recognized as an expert in Internet regulations.
She is involved in writing about online pornography issues and, along with an NGO called CP80.org, in creating solutions that combine consumer choice with legislation. Ms. Preston publishes articles on the relation between law and religion, and law and popular cultural images.
Prior to being a part of Brigham Young University, she was a law clerk in United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.[1]