7 Things You Should Know About Free Speech in Schools
Episode 1 of Free Speech Rules, a new video series by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh
Episode 1 of Free Speech Rules, a new video series by UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh
"This comedy night...aims to provide a safe space for everyone to share and listen."
"I was complicit. I recognize that I need to reflect on what took place and do thoughtful, informed work to educate myself."
Event organizers apologize for "the hurt his words caused members of the community."
"Free speech is one thing. Hate speech is entirely different."
"Events policy requires us to consider whether an event would pose substantial risk to the safety of any member of our campus community."
"Any other result would have undermined the free speech and academic freedom rights of all Rutgers faculty members."
"It opens the door ... to charge conservatives for more security, whereas leftist speakers are not charged extra fees."
Rossier School of Education student also created a petition to require racial sensitivity training.
"Viewed as derogatory towards those of Asian descent."
Samuel Abrams says the college's president accused him of "attacking" the community and suggested he might be looking for a new job.
"My identity is not up for debate."
What worked to limit Jewish enrollment 100 years ago has also worked to limit Asian enrollment.
"The students were not asked if they were traumatized and they were not asked if they experienced a traumatic event."
The Student Senate has no regrets, will continue to believe survivors.
Raises concerns about academic freedom, pseudoscience.
Trying to compel this sort of speech violates the rights of professors.
"Most members of the 'exhausted majority,' and then some, dislike political correctness."
The Hamilton, Texas City Manager, claims the police didn't threaten her or forcibly remove the sign, but that "a police member visited the owner's home, and the owner asked the officer to take the sign."
"This is such an absurd contortion of Title IX that I suspect even those filing the complaint know it's unlikely to succeed as a matter of law."
"For civil disobedience to be praiseworthy and serious, protestors must be willing to bear the costs of the then-extant sanctions."
"Can a faculty member now never speak on the character of an ex-student when they are in trouble with the law?"
"Solutions won't come from new laws from Washington, D.C., or from a speech police at the U.S. Department of Education."
The Office for Civil Rights decision is in some ways opaque and equivocal, but the message to universities seems pretty powerful -- such decisions about enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights of Act may turn on whether the university tolerates certain criticisms of Israel that OCR has now labeled "anti-Semitic."
The weird interrelationship between harassment law and campus free speech
If you believe that unconstitutional speech codes are a scandal at public universities, two recent cases should worry you.
"It was explained to them why this is hate speech and that it is offensive and triggering."
A very brief history of the rise and fall (and potential rise again) of campus speech codes. [UPDATE: Very sorry, at first accidentally labeled this as my post -- it's actually Greg Lukianoff's & Adam Goldstein's.]
At behest of a feminist professor, an academic journal's board reportedly threatened to "harass the journal until it died."
Campus mental health, freedom of speech, and government policy.
There is no "clearly established" First Amendment rights of public university professional school students to engage in such speech, a federal court holds.
The top-paid OSU diversity czar makes $265,000.
The policy -- here, applied to someone passing out religious valentines -- also bans "signs ... with offensive content," and more generally limits even nonoffensive signs and leafleting to a narrow "free speech zone."
Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff explain how "good intentions and bad ideas" have made young people super-fragile-and how to make things better.
Plus: Why Jordan Peterson may be right about postmodern neo-Marxism.
Uncensored author and new college grad Zachary R. Wood explains why his generation is so scared of viewpoint diversity.
A judge sides with a Brown University student who says the Title IX process was unfair and discriminatory.
"Okay, officially, I now hate white people" is a gross statement that deserves First Amendment protection.
#MeToo madness: it's wrong to use Title IX, a feminist tool, "to take down a feminist."
Daniele Struppa says progressives who would deny money simply because of who gives it pose "a grave threat to academic freedom."
"Trigger warnings may inadvertently undermine some aspects of emotional resilience."
Marquette is ordered to reinstate John McAdams.
Deb Mashek explains why intellectual diversity can't be optional if we're serious about higher education.
President David Cole says guidelines "are explicitly designed to help affiliates and national staff think through various factors in case selection decisions."
"Our defense of speech may have a greater or lesser harmful impact on the equality and justice work to which we are also committed."
Peterson: "SJWs" evolved from Marxism.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10