Category Archives: Free Speech

The progression of a terminal illness is never a pretty thing to witness.

We had a diagnosis after the infamous Milo Yiannopoulos had to flee his scheduled speech at UC Berkeley earlier this year for fear of physical harm at the hands of leftist rioters, and the condition deteriorated when the administration put up roadblocks to prevent David Horowitz from coming to campus.

For the leftists on campus, its always 'free speech for me, but not for thee.'

Wednesday afternoon, at approximately 12:45 PM Eastern time, free speech passed away due to complications from the threat of violence as Ann Coulter announced she would not be speaking at the university.

Free speech had a good run, of course; back in the 1960s, there was even an entire movement supporting the ideaBerkeleyput up a website to celebrate its 50th anniversary (though how much the movement was actually about free speech as the average American would recognize the concept is debatable, as Jonah Goldberg points out here).

Now? Heaven forbid that you host a man who is as flamboyantly anti-leftist as he is gay; marauders will set fires and vandalize businesses because they cant bear the thought of residing in the same zip code as Yiannopoulos. Try to bring a woman to campus who has been physically assaultedduring her speechifying before, and the mere threat of violence will force the cancellation of her talk.

Thats just the new status quo these days. For the leftists on campus, its always free speech for me, but not for thee. Dildo jugglingis a valid form of protest, but hosting a panel of non-leftistswill bring the shrieking ninnies out.

They never call it censorship, of course; the left never does something as objectionable as that. They merely no-platform the speaker. They exercise the hecklers veto. Then they justify it by saying theyre opposing violence.

Yes, violence. Literal violence. Hadnt you heard? Speech is violence, especially hate speech, which is defined as anything they dont like. According to this bizarre worldview, since speech is violence, physical violence is justified in return. Theyll even say so in so many words.

The key to restoring free speech is simply law and order. Auburn University, even though it recently had to host the repulsive Richard Spencer, didn't see the same sort of violence that Berkeley has seen. Why?

Because law enforcement unmasked the so-called "antifascists" on a judges orderssummoning the courage to sucker punch someone is a lot harder when you know your actions will be forever linked to your face.

The judge who ruled that Spencer must be allowed to speak declared that "Discrimination on the basis of message content cannot be tolerated under the First Amendment." Would that Berkeley were under his jurisdiction!

So, for now, free speech is dead at Berkeley. Well see if it rises, Lazarus-like, later this year when Milo Yiannopoulosreturns with an army, as he has vowed to do. Well see, but Im skeptical.

It will take more than an army. Itll take a paradigm shift. And Berkeley hasnt changed in decades.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @SterlingCBeard

Go here to see the original:
A requiem to free speech - Campus Reform

News & Observer

Campus free speech bill now heads to NC Senate News & Observer Dubbed Restore/preserve campus free speech, House Bill 527 is a mandate for North Carolina's public universities to ensure the fullest degree of intellectual freedom and free expression and to guarantee campuses be open to all speakers. The bill ... and more »

Read the rest here:
Campus free speech bill now heads to NC Senate - News & Observer

State Sen. Patrick Colbeck

State Sen. Patrick Colbeck, R-Canton Township, has introduced two bills he says would require state universities to adopt policies that protect free speech and intellectual debate on campus and ensure that invited speakers would be allowed to speak.

The text of the legislation, embodied in Senate Bills 349 and 350, has not yet been posted on the website of the Michigan Legislature. Colbeck calls his proposal the campus free speech act.

The concept of free speech under the First Amendment is one of our core values as Americans, Colbeck said in a press release. The right to free speech at our schools is a particularly important piece of the fabric of our country. It is at this time that many of our younger citizens first start to realize the true importance of both their individual voice and the ability to learn from the differences of others.

The release says universities and colleges would have to adopt policies that prioritize both the dissemination of knowledge and the importance of peaceful free expression. However, illegal speech such as defamation, sexual harassment and true threats of violence would not be allowed.

Constitutional experts agree that the litmus test for when free speech should be barred has little to do with whether others believe it is objectionable, Colbeck said. In fact, that is why we need the First Amendment. We do not need a First Amendment to protect against the speech we agree with. Groupthink is the last thing we want to see on our campuses.

Nationwide, conservative and libertarian speakers invited to college campuses have had their events canceled and in some cases faced violent protests.

In Michigan, students at Kellogg Community College filed a lawsuit this year against the college after they were arrested and jailed for refusing to stop handing out pocket copies of the U.S. Constitution on campus.

Michigan Capitol Confidential has highlighted colleges in Michigan with questionable free speech policies through a series of stories earlier this year.

Colbecks legislation would also make all public areas on campus open as public forums to allow the same terms to any speaker, according to the press release.

If campus leaders believe some speech creates a safety concern because of unruly audience members wishing to use violence, they must police those who would break the law in order to stifle free speech, and not punish speakers by taking away their voice, Colbeck said. Intellectual freedom on our campuses must not be bullied into silence.

State Board of Education member Tom McMillin said he supports Colbecks bills.

I hope it covers handing out Constitutions at community colleges, McMillin said in an email. The left so often wants to silence speech they dont like. Taxpayer dollars should not go to such institutions. I actually think he should put the free speech provisions in the budget. If higher education institutions want tax dollars, they must eliminate all anti-free speech policies. Put them in boilerplate.

Related Articles:

Rights and Responsibilities Collide: Student Free Speech Bill Struggles

Henry Ford Community College Gets 'Yellow Light' Rating for Speech Code

DeVos Attacked For Supporting Free Speech, Due Process On Campus

Repressive Speech Codes At Michigan Community Colleges Model PC Universities

Official Bias Response Enforcers Stifle Michigan Universities

Read the original post:
Colbeck Introduces Bill to Crack Down on Campus Free Speech Infringements - Michigan Capitol Confidential

Townhall

Free Speech at N.Y.U. - The New York Times New York Times The university's provost writes to clarify the school's position on free speech. Professor: Left Wing Snowflakes Get Some Things Right About Free ...Townhall NYT Opinion Writer: Censorship is Free SpeechThe Libertarian Republic Articles: For Anti-Free Speech Prof, We're Just Bricks in the WallAmerican Thinker The Atlantic -Washington Examiner all 7 news articles »

More:
Free Speech at N.Y.U. - The New York Times - New York Times

In a perfect world, Ann Coulter would have given a speech Thursday, at UC Berkeley, as originally scheduled. She would have spoken on immigration and no doubt aroused passionate reaction ranging from rabid applause to sputtering apoplexy.

Its her schtick, peddling provocation from about as far right as you get. And she is very good at what she does.

She was invited to appear at UC Berkeley on Thursday, and in a perfect world the speech would have gone off without a hitch. But before Thursday could get here, the city of Berkeley was rocked by three politically themed violent demonstrations in three months. UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks, prudently fearing the worst, asked Coulter to reschedule for May 2.

One assumes the date wasnt picked at random. May 2 is the beginning of a dead week before finals, a time when the campus would be a ghost town. Coulter, for whom an audience is like oxygen, declined.

It is a dark day for free speech in America, she said in a tweet.

By the letter of the Bill of Rights, she is correct. The First Amendment is a bedrock principle of our country. And Coulter was denied her right to speak at the time and venue of her choosing.

Heres the irony:

Denied her right to free speech, she has spent the better part of a week on a filibustering First Amendment-fest. Seriously, she hasnt shut up. She has been omnipresent, making dozens of posts on her Twitter and Facebook accounts and making the media rounds. For all we know, she churned out another of her New York Times best-sellers between tweets. No one could possibly wonder what she is thinking.

And she is thinking.

She not only kept the narrative of this nonevent alive, she drove it with skill and dexterity, keeping her fans, detractors and the press sprinting from one shiny object to the next.

She bashed UC Berkeley:

She exhibiteddefiance:

She even found time for a little self-promotion:

She hinted that she would show up for the originally scheduled event, insisting it was up to police to keep me safe. Then backed off and confirmed it was canceled. Then said she might show up Thursday to stroll around the graveyard of the First Amendment.

In short, she occasioned a brilliant bit of branding, delivering her message in spades and reaping a priceless windfall of free publicity along the way certainly more attention than she would have generated from a speech.

She is such an astute messenger that it was hardly a surprise early Thursday afternoon when, despite the cancellation, groups of all stripes and agendas began trickling into Berkeley. As of 3 p.m., the most prominent feature of the gathering was a bubble-blowing machine. Perhaps fittingly, the nonevent generated a nonviolent assembly.

As if to underscore that point, a Twitter post included a photo of a plane towing a banner above the gathering. The banner read,Dont take the bait, rise above the hate!!

A nice thought. But theres no money in that.

The rest is here:
How Ann Coulter cashed in on a 'dark day for free speech' - The Mercury News

News & Observer

Campus free speech bill passes House News & Observer State lawmakers have waded into the charged campus free speech debate, 54 years after the legislature famously banned Communist speakers at the University of North Carolina. This time around, there's no speaker ban, but rather an insistence that ... Free speech bill sponsored by Pender Rep. Millis passes state HouseWECT-TV6 all 3 news articles »

Continue reading here:
Campus free speech bill passes House - News & Observer

Nasty, thuggish attacks on free speech by leftist students, often aided by outside Antifa allies, has reached crisis stage. We have a large cadre of people whod have fit in perfectly with Maos Red Brigades because they are eager to enforce ideological purity and punish those who disagree with progressive beliefs. What must be done?

That is the question Martin Center president Jenna Robinson and Anna Beavon Gravely (the North Carolina spokeswoman for Generation Opportunity) explore in this article.

While some college leaders at least say they want to stop the attacks and restore free speech and civility, we shouldnt expect too much from the higher-education establishment itself. As the authors explain,

A recent survey of 440 American universities indicates that nearly half of them have adopted policies that infringe on the First Amendment rights of students. Also, many schools are willing to fire dissenting employees and create free speech zones for the sake of maintaining their public image and avoiding controversy. And in some cases a double standard has been established, where controversial expression is tolerated so long as it has a liberal slant.

Perhaps state politicians can use their authority over the colleges and universities they fund (and are supposed to be able to control but thats very problematic) to deal with the free-speech problem. Toward that end, the Goldwater Institute has drafted model legislation called the Restore Campus Free Speech Act and it is now under consideration in a number of states, including North Carolina. The General Assembly has begun hearings on a bill modeled on the RCFSA. Guess what? The general counsel for the UNC system testified that it is unnecessary and the ACLUs spokesperson objected that it is overly broad. The bill will probably pass despite such objections. Then we will find out if Governor Cooper, a Democrat who narrowly won last November, will sign it or veto it to make leftists happy.

One thing all the riots and disruptions have accomplished is to wake many Americans up the the fact that free speech is in danger. Perhaps soon, optimistically write Robinson and Gravely, higher education will return to being a bastion of free speech and intellectual diversity. That indeed must be the goal, and it it is not accomplished, more and more Americans might decide to do their college work at schools that havent let themselves become enclaves of, to use Jonah Goldbergs apt phrase, liberal fascism.

More here:
Who Will Take the Threats to Free Speech on Campus Seriously? - National Review

Photo: Brett Coomer, Houston Chronicle

Students line up in a silent protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texa A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Students line up in a silent protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texa A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

People stand next to a line of riot police outside the Memorial Student Center as they protest white nationalist Richard Spencer speaking at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

People stand next to a line of riot police outside the Memorial Student Center as they protest white nationalist Richard Spencer speaking at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

People are used back by riot police outside the Memorial Student Center as they protest white nationalist Richard Spencer speaking at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

People are used back by riot police outside the Memorial Student Center as they protest white nationalist Richard Spencer speaking at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

Law enforcement officers line a crowd of protestors during a speech on campus by White Nationalist Richard Spencer on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Law enforcement officers line a crowd of protestors during a speech on campus by White Nationalist Richard Spencer on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Students line up in a silent protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texas A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Students line up in a silent protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texas A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Demonstrators protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texas A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Demonstrators protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texas A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Texas A&M freshman Marshall Sullivan holds a rainbow flag as students protest a speech at the university by white nationalist Richard Spencer Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

Texas A&M freshman Marshall Sullivan holds a rainbow flag as students protest a speech at the university by white nationalist Richard Spencer Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

Students line up in a silent protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texas A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Students line up in a silent protest against the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on the campus of Texas A&M University on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Demonstrators march on the campus of Texas A&M University protesting the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Demonstrators march on the campus of Texas A&M University protesting the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Demonstrators argue the points during a protest march on the campus of Texas A&M University protesting the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

Demonstrators argue the points during a protest march on the campus of Texas A&M University protesting the speech of White Nationalist Richard Spencer on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016, in College Station.

White nationalist Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

White nationalist Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

A protestor holds up a sign that reads "Heil No" as white nationalist Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

A protestor holds up a sign that reads "Heil No" as white nationalist Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

Students, protestors and supporters take video as white nationalist Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

Students, protestors and supporters take video as white nationalist Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2016 in College Station.

Senate panel considers bill protecting university free speech

Texas senators entered the polarizing discussion on campus free speech in a higher education committee hearing on Wednesday.

Sen. Dawn Buckingham, a Lakeway Republican, introduced legislation that forbids universities and colleges from punishing students for engaging in expressive activities and requires these schools to adopt a policy outlining students right to assemble, protest and circulate petitions.

The bill, she said, seeks to more clearly define what is permitted on college campuses in an effort to protect students' rights. It serves to remind schools of free speech guarantees set out by federal and state law, she said.

LOST CAUSE: University of Texas to leave Confederate statues in place, for now

Universities across the state and nation have grappled with how to balance the right to free speech and student calls for sensitivity amid controversial speakers and inflammatory fliers on campuses. Students have called for more restrictive speech policies and urged their schools to cancel events, arguing that this expression promotes discomfort and feelings of alienation, particularly among minority students.

The debate brought President Donald Trump into the fold in February as he criticized the University of California at Berkeley after riots required the school to cancel an appearance by a far-right writer. If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view NO FEDERAL FUNDS? he wrote on Twitter.

If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view - NO FEDERAL FUNDS?

In Texas, sharp outcry followed the announcement that white supremacist Richard Spencer would speak at Texas A&M University in College Station last year. More than 10,000 people signed a petition asking the university to cancel the event after Spencer evoked Nazi salutes at a high-profile speech in the nations capitol.

EXTENSION POSSIBLE: Texas A&M weighing new deal for school's chancellor

The university stood firm: Leaders said that they found Spencers views reprehensible and did not invite him to campus, but they said they had no power to block him from speaking on campus. Since then, it has amended its speaker policy to require outside speakers to be sponsored by recognized Texas A&M student organizations, the Associated Press reported.

And universities across the state have seen white nationalist, anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant posters on campuses since Trumps election in November. Administrators atRice Universityand the University of Texas at Austin cited campus policy as they removed those leaflets, saying that the posters were put up in restricted places.

Buckingham acknowledged that her bill largely reinforced the First Amendment and the Texas Constitution.

Sen. Larry Taylor, a Friendswood Republican, said the bill would allow lawmakers to take a stand against student intimidation that he said discourages conservative voices. If you have one group so forceful that they dont allow another group to express their opinions, weve lost a battle.

An initial version of the bill forbid university employees from dis-inviting campus speakers at the request of students. That provision was struck in the committee substitute, which Buckingham said was created after input from universities.

Scroll through the gallery above to see Texs A&M students protesting white supremacist Richard Spencer

Read the original post:
Senate panel considers bill protecting university free speech ... - Chron.com

Thomas Leaycraft, Middlebury Student April 26, 2017 Filed under Opinions

Share on Facebook

Share via Email

March 2, the day of the Charles Murray talk, was never going to be easy for Middlebury. Free speech and civil disobedience, two of our nations most challenging and sacred traditions, seemed to collide. In this war of virtues, everybody lost; the mob silenced Charles Murray, the media dragged Middleburys name through the mud for weeks and the protesters now face punishment.

Civil disobedience is a tremendously respectable endeavor. Standing up for ones principles in the face of certain punishment, as many in our community did to protest the ideas of Dr. Murrays book The Bell Curve, even after an administrator read aloud the Colleges code of conduct in the Wilson auditorium, reveals noble conviction. However, now many are demanding that the administration excuse these violations of college policy, and in essence, take a stance in this battle of ideals by deciding whether Murrays beliefs preclude him from the right to speak freely they should not.

Much can and has been written about the Murray incident. Even in its entirety, that weeks Campus could not contain the full range of perspectives on whether bringing controversial speakers like Murray to campus constitutes platforming or provides an understanding of deplorable ideas and institutions, which could be a valuable insight in the fight for change and social justice. While many find Dr. Murrays beliefs contribute to systems of oppression and racism, Middlebury must uphold the right to free speech.

Of course, the liberal arts philosophy, Middleburys guiding principle, deems the sharing of widely varying ideas as indispensable to developing an understanding of the world. But furthermore, free speech is a fragile privilege and requires protection, whereas civil disobedience, by definition, does not. Upholding this privilege and measure of equality the right to speak without censorship is essential. A precedent that speech can be restricted is a dangerous infringement on all of our rights.

Our college made a statement on March 2 and, while I disapprove of the means by which we silenced Dr. Murray, I take some pride in belonging to a community which so passionately defends women and people of color. However, the time has come to accept the consequences of our actions. The Colleges punishment of protesters serves as a defense of all of our rights to speak freely. Bernie Sanders recently said of Ann Coulters controversial visit to UC Berkley, what are you afraid of her ideas? Ask her the hard questions. Confront her intellectually. Our freedom to denounce Murray and institutionalized injustices and Murrays freedom of speech derive from a common, sacred privilege.

This has been a bad year for speech. The school year began with conversations surrounding the need for civility in discourse, and is ending with debates over whether or not people who say reprehensible things, or even hold deplorable beliefs, have the right to speak at all. We silenced Dr. Murray, though he came to discuss his latest book Coming Apart, which focuses largely on the growing rift between the values of upper and working class whites essentially the Trump coalition without any mention of racial supremacy or eugenics. We set a dangerous precedent: we silenced not because of what he planned to say, but because of what he believes.

Opinions Editor Thomas Leaycraft 20 writes about punishment in the wake of the Charles Murray protests.

Read the original:
Middlebury Campus : Free Speech vs. Civil Disobedience - Middlebury Campus (subscription)

New York Times

What 'Snowflakes' Get Right About Free Speech New York Times This exchange, conveyed to me by the Russian literature scholar Victor Erlich some years ago, has stayed with me, and it has taken on renewed significance as the struggles on American campuses to negotiate issues of free speech have intensified most ... and more »

More:
What 'Snowflakes' Get Right About Free Speech - New York Times