Teddy Roosevelt and free speech

Throughout modern history, colleges have been known for protecting unpopular expression.

This blog uses a photo of President Teddy Roosevelt (above) giving a speech defending Professor John Bassett on the Duke University campus in 1903.

Bassett was in danger of being fired for saying he thought  Booker T. Washington (an African American leader) was the greatest person the South had ever produced except Robert E. Lee.

Racist newspapers and opinion leaders demanded that Bassett be fired outright for expressing an opinion that,  today, would be seen as far too deferential to Gen. Lee.

But the Duke University board refused to fire Bassett, and President Roosevelt took a train south to praise them, saying:

“You stand for Academic Freedom, for the right of private judgment, for a duty more incumbent upon the scholar than upon any other man, to tell the truth as he sees it, to claim for himself and to give to others the largest liberty in seeking after the truth.”

It’s been a long time since any defense of campus speech has been given with such force and clarity.

Déjà vu all over again — student newspaper thefts at RU

by Bill Rickards
Foundation for Individual Rights in Education

October 7, 2019

Famous New York Yankees coach and manager Yogi Berra once said, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.” That’s close to how it feels here at FIRE when we hear student newspapers have been stolen from stands on campus.

Take, for example, the most recent case of newspaper theft at Radford University, where about 1,000 copies of Radford’s student newspaper, The Tartan, went missing from newsstands following the publication of controversial articles. This type of press censorship is something FIRE has written about again and again.

MORE

ALSO SEE

How long are we going to wait?” Editor in chief criticizes Radford’s newspaper theft investigation. By the Student Press Law Center,  Feb. 2020.

Higher Ed & the 1st Amendment

Featured

RU Speechless?

Freedom of speech and press are fundamental rights guaranteed under the Virginia Constitution, the First Amendment of the US Bill of Rights and Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

But freedom of speech is often not recognized in the one place where it ought to be respected the most:  A college campus in the USA.

Today many universities simply refuse to recognize First Amendment rights until they are forced to do so by a court. At Radford University, where this blog formed the  report of a class requested by then-provost Sam Minner, avenues for student expression are strictly limited in ways that are clearly unconstitutional. Continue reading

RU lack of public forum spaces

Featured

In a student media committee meeting Oct 22, 2021, an administrator said she “had to take down” recruiting posters for student media since they were on the walls and not in the appropriate space.
She said she moved them to a (the?)  bulletin board in the Hurlburt Student Center and asked that future student media recruiting posters go directly to her to ensure proper placement.
This is important, since it reflects the fact that RU lacks public forum bulletin board space to advertise student activities or reflect student concerns.  Similar posters, such as one in 2019  protesting tuition rate hikes, are routinely taken down from walls and other public spaces.

Is there a free speech crisis in American universities?

“The claim that America’s campuses are in the midst of a free speech crisis has been made so often and so emphatically that it has widely become accepted as fact. According to the prevailing narrative, liberal professors and students have turned institutions of higher learning into elitist enclaves, where any thought that does not conform to leftist orthodoxy is aggressively suppressed… (but this is) as untrue today as it was in the 1970s,” writes Mary Anne Franks in the Dec. 30, 2019 edition of the Virginia Law Review.

“The assertion that conservative ideas are being violently suppressed on college campuses is as untrue today as it was in the 1970s. While there have been a handful of violent incidents involving conservative speakers, the vast majority of universities have experienced no such controversies. The attempts at ideological suppression that do occur on campuses are far more likely to target leftist views than right-wing views…”

 

 

Censorship by Theft on Radford University’s Campus

Featured

Editorial, Washington Post, Nov 14, 2019 —  Radford University, a taxpayer-supported institution in southwestern Virginia, is in a public relations hole entirely of its own making. The question is how deep its administrators will insist on digging…

It turns out, after what campus police called an “in-depth” investigation, that a low-level university employee — neither administrator nor professor — was caught on video and admitted stealing papers from four of the news racks, as The Post’s Joe Heim reported. The administration and police won’t reveal the thief’s identity, although they know it; they won’t charge the employee because they say taking free newspapers is not a crime; and they won’t offer an explanation of who swiped the papers from 18 other news racks. Nor will they offer a motive or explanation for the theft…

The university’s strategy, if you can call it that, is tailor-made to prolong Radford’s embarrassment, calling into question its leadership’s judgment…

MORE — 

US Supreme Court puts a town’s sign regulations in their place

In Reed v Town of Gilbert,  Ariz., 135 S. Ct. 2218 (2015), the Supreme Court held that a town’s sign regulations violated the First Amendment because they were content based and could not survive “strict scrutiny.”

A ‘content based’ regulation is one that restricts a particular kind of content.  In the town of Gilbert, a regulation strictly limited temporary directional signs for religious events.  In its opinion, the court said:

“Because content-based laws target speech based on its communicative content, they are presumptively unconstitutional and may be justified only if the government proves that they are narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests. E.g., R. A. V. v. St. Paul, 505 U. S. 377, 395.

 In contrast, a content-neutral regulation for signs might be one that restricts the size or safety features  of a sign. That kind of regulation only has to survive intermediate scrutiny, which tests whether a law  is narrowly tailored to serve a substantial government interest.

Following Reed, it is obvious on the face of it that the  City of Radford’s  Greek Sign Ordinances violates the First Amendment.  Other cases concerning content specific laws, if applied to the city of Radford’s regulation,  would very likely have led to this same conclusion.

Further reading:  

Supreme Court Opinion, Reed v Town of Gilbert, June 18, 2015.

What’s wrong with the Greek Sign Ordinances?   (This site) 

Susan L. Trevarthen * and Adam M. Hapner ** (Summer, 2020). LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAW SYMPOSIUM: ARTICLE: THE TRUE IMPACT OF REED V. TOWN OF GILBERT ON SIGN REGULATION. Stetson Law Review, 49, 509. https://advance-lexis-com.radford.idm.oclc.org/api/document?collection=analytical-materials&id=urn:contentItem:6059-M551-DXPM-S018-00000-00&context=1516831.

Dixie University loses lawsuit over Greek letters

ST. GEORGE, Utah, May 5, 2015—Dixie State University has announced that it will suspend the unconstitutional speech codes that three students challenged in a First Amendment lawsuit filed in March. The lawsuit, which is supported by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), targeted Dixie State’s unconstitutional flyer approval process, posting policies, “free speech zone,” and club event policies—all of which are now suspended.

In addition to suspending the speech codes, Dixie State President Richard B. Williams announced in an email yesterday to the campus community that the university will permanently revise its policies. In his email, President Williams stated that Dixie State is a place “where even unpopular answers, seemingly absurd ideas, and unconventional thought are not only permitted, but even encouraged.”

FIRE will continue to monitor developments at Dixie State closely to ensure that the university’s apparent recognition of First Amendment principles translates into meaningful policy reform.

(MORE)

USA Today covers RU Speechless

300-0513-bulletin

 

Bulletin boards have become a battleground at Radford University in Radford, Va., with students claiming university policies restrict their First Amendment rights.

The policy in question requires university approval for any flier students wish to hang on campus bulletin boards. Over the past semester, journalism professor Bill Kovarik has led a small movement called RU Speechless?, which protests this regulation, among other campus “censorship” policies, as prior restraint.

 

Story Published May 8, 2013 

Tartan covers RU Speechless

Speechles1 Speechless2Students in the First Amendment and Higher Education class are bearing flyers, a hard-hitting message and symbolically wearing red duct tape over their mouths, and have been rallying with faculty and other involved and driven students with the campaign they call “RU Speechless.”