"The Act of Silencing a Speaker Is Fundamentally Contrary to the Values of This School"

From Fox News (Jessica Chasmar):

Ilya Shapiro, a constitutional scholar who recently found himself in hot water over a tweet about President Biden's Supreme Court nominee, was shouted down by law students in San Francisco, videos show.

Shapiro joined a discussion Tuesday afternoon about Justice Stephen Breyer's Supreme Court vacancy at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, but he was interrupted by protesters pounding on desks and chanting "Black lawyers matter." …

UC Hastings sent a letter to students Wednesday morning condemning the protesters' behavior, saying it violated the code of conduct.

"The act of silencing a speaker is fundamentally contrary to the values of this school as an institution of higher learning; it is contrary to the pedagogical mission of training students for a profession in which they will prevail through the power of analysis and argument," the school said in the letter, obtained by Fox News Digital.

Glad UC Hastings responded, and I hope that the violations of the code of conduct will come with some actual disciplinary measures. I'm not out for blood here: Shouting down a speaker is bad, but I think not, say, an offense meriting expulsion. There just ought to be some meaningful punishment for such misbehavior, or else the misbehavior will just get repeated.

I've heard some people argue that such heckling is itself constitutionally protected speech, but I don't think that's right (at least unless a school deliberately opens up such presentations as free shouting zones for everyone). Generally speaking, schools may and do set up viewpoint-neutral restrictions on speech at such events, generally that the speakers speak for X minutes and then the audience gets to ask questions for Y minutes, with the speakers responding. And of course student groups at law schools are generally free to set up their own events, where their views can be presented without being shouted down (or even materially interrupted by chanting and the like).

Of course, if shouting down is considered acceptable speech, I expect that many people may want to take advantage of it: some anti-abortion activists who oppose pro-abortion-rights speakers, some anti-critical-race-theory activists who oppose critical race theorists, some gun rights activists who oppose advocates of what they see as oppressive and unconstitutional violations of people's gun rights, and more. I'd rather that none of them get to shout down rival speakers—but if critics of Shapiro were entitled to "silenc[e]" him at UC Hastings, then First Amendment viewpoint-neutrality rules would require that critics of other speakers would be entitled to silence them, too.

Comments

[Cal Cetín]

The problem is that right-wing hecklers would get more than a sternly-worded letter.

[CindyF]

Businesses should stop hiring from these universities until degrees from them are worthless. Maybe then some changes will be made by the administration and such behavior would not be allowed. What happened to listening politely to a speaker and then debating him using your in-depth knowledge supporting an opposing viewpoint?

I know, I know, but a person can dream?

[CindyF]

Leftist professors are at fault for creating these cretins. They will not change their behavior until THEY have to live by the rules they have foisted onto the rest of us. I say let’s start shouting down the leftist speakers and canceling the leftist students. Conservatives should interview and research any potential hire and not hire anyone who has expressed anti-free speech positions in the past, or even espoused views supporting the leftist agenda.

[Snorkle]

Always pleasant to hear from the McCarthyite types.

But I suggest maybe you want to give these leftists a chance to change their tune. Maybe if you publicly denounce them while they’re on display, the community can express their feelings about how they’ve been injured by the evil devils. Maybe check this out for some pointers on technique:

https://prezi.com/gwd0fy_e4clo/teachers-during-the-cultural-revolution/

[Darth Chocolate]

The only way a leftist changes his tune is to move further left.

[Don Nico]

And that is when the Stalinists have them assassinated

[Sarcastr0]

This kind of dumbass knee-jerk cartoonification of the other side just shows your own partisanship.

Plenty of leftists moderate. How many of the hippies sold out in the end and got jobs and started families?

[Seamus]

I’ve heard some people argue that such heckling is itself constitutionally protected speech, but I don’t think that’s right (at least unless a school deliberately opens up such presentations as free shouting zones for everyone).

Heckling is one thing, but shouting down a speaker so he cannot be heard is quite another.

[Krayt]

How much heckling turns into a heckler’s veto, functionally stopping the presentation?

Of course, that can be the obvious goal, not snarky rejoinders.

[Eric VonSalzen]

When I was in college in the ’60’s I took a course on urban problems from the great Edward Banfield. During a typical 50 min. lecture, 5-15 minutes would be wasted by a few students loudly proclaiming their opinions about how wrong Banfield was. He was very patient. But the loud-mouthed students didn’t try to prevent him from speaking, after they had expressed their (largely ignorant, but loud) contrary opinions. I didn’t realize at the time how lucky I was that I was able to hear at least some of Banfield’s lecture.
I wonder if some activist lawyers couldn’t comeup with a cause of action that would impose damages on “students” who intentionally interfere with the education that real students (or their parents, or whoever funds their scholarships) pay a pot-load of money for?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Banfield was a discredited anti-government crank who died a culture war casualty.

[jdgalt1]

What would be the legal position if the speaker who has permission to use the hall brings his own security personnel and has them forcibly eject any hecklers? Because that seems to me a more just and more effective response.

[Cal Cetín]

I can’t believe you’d endorse police brutality against peaceful demonstrators!

/sarc

[TwelveInchPianist]

“I’m not out for blood here: Shouting down a speaker is bad, but I think not, say, an offense meriting expulsion. There just ought to be some meaningful punishment for such misbehavior, or else the misbehavior will just get repeated.”

It sounds like faculty members were encouraging the misconduct. There’s where the blood ought to come from. Faculty telling students to do this stuff ought to be grounds for termination.

The reason many kids act this way is because they’re being taught to “call out” behavior that they think is wrong rather than to think critically.

[Sarcastr0]

It sounds like faculty members were encouraging the misconduct

Where do you get this from?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

(1) Bigots have rights, too.

(2) Not all boors are conservatives.

[J. Denny]

I have an interesting question. Since this is tied to a specific student group at a specific law school could employers take that into account in hiring decisions ? For instance might the hiring partner at a white shoe law firm say oh you are part of the law student student group that engaged in non lawyerly conduct at an academic event maybe you are not a cultural fit.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Seems pretty clear that the students doing the heckling are lesser students, destined to become lesser lawyers.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, being an overenthusiastic activist in your youth means you’ll never grow up to amount to anything.

[Perry Noyed]

It’s incredibly sad when a First Amendment scholar needs to state the obvious: If it’s acceptable to shut down any speaker, then it is acceptable to shut down all speakers.

And yet, here we are.