Most
the universities
in America say they value
freedom of speech,
But actions speak louder than words. And based on the actions of several universities, they only value certain types of speech.
I’m director of the Center for Academic Freedom at the Alliance Defending Freedom, and I’ve noticed three ways in which university officials have suppressed speech from students who hold views at odds with the new system constantly evolution.
academic orthodoxy.
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICT WRITES PLAN FOR TEACHER HOUSING NATIONWIDE
First, university officials will distance themselves from the values of certain student groups (often conservative groups), thereby giving the impression to other students that they should do something about it. Too often, that “something” takes the form of a violent mob.
Second, college administrators will accept the word of the “offended” party without conducting an honest investigation into the alleged injuries, quickly ruling on the matter without truly giving other students involved time to prepare their defense.
Finally, where administrators could easily guarantee safety and free speech during a potentially controversial event, they will instead refuse to enforce the law, often creating a chilling effect on future events intended to promote free thought and the speech.
Earlier this year, for example, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute and College Republicans chapters of
University of Pittsburgh
I wanted to organize a debate at school. The debate featured speakers Michael Knowles and Brad Polumbo. The event was titled “Should Transgenderism Be Regulated by Law?” » and it was planned to feature a moderated debate followed by 30 minutes of questions and answers and 40 minutes of meeting.
Before the event, the university issued a press release calling the debate “toxic and hurtful to many people in our university community.” Dean Ann Cudd called Knowles’ views “repugnant” and “hate-filled” and invited students to “several events planned for Tuesday, April 18 in response to Knowles’ unwanted presence on campus.” These “multiple events” turned into a violent mob that disrupted the end of the event, incited by university officials – a fact the university disputes even after waiving security fees for nearly 19 $000 paid to the groups organizing the event.
Sometimes, however, students use school officials to attack other students, as in the case of
Maggie DeJong
at Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville. After posting his Christian views on various cultural topics online, three students reported DeJong to university officials. And in February 2022, those officials hit her with no-contact orders, accusing her of “harassment” and “discrimination.” She did not receive an explanation of the accusations against her for two weeks.
Those officials recently participated in First Amendment training as part of a settlement agreement after DeJong sued the school.
A similar situation occurred in
University of Idaho
when three Christian law students and their academic advisor received restraining orders after explaining why their chapter of the Christian Legal Society held to biblical views on marriage. This case also resulted in a favorable settlement for our clients after a court issued a preliminary ruling in our favor.
While some universities engage directly in speech disputes, others demonstrate a degree of cowardice that, in itself, constitutes an attempt to paralyze speech. In March, a
Students for Life of America
The Virginia Commonwealth University chapter invited the national organization’s president, Kristan Hawkins, to speak on campus. A crowd of protesters showed up and blocked the doors while shouting obscenities and insults at students who wanted to attend the event. The crowd became violent, destroying the group’s audio-visual equipment and attacking pro-life students. Paramedics then arrived on scene after several students were injured.
The ADF sent a letter to VCU, saying it had failed in its constitutional duty to provide security in an effort to protect free speech. In response, Hawkins was invited back, and this time security was called and stopped the mob’s efforts before further violence could be committed.
While universities should support speech and encourage young people to become sensible adults, officials devote enormous effort to coddling preferred viewpoints, pitting students against each other, and then discarding responsibility when certain events go wrong. Students need to be aware of their constitutionally protected rights and how they can defend them when administrators who should be encouraging them suppress their right to express a point of view.
Students must learn to engage with all types of ideas, and that starts with universities that promote, not hinder, open discourse.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON RESTORING AMERICA
Tyson Langhofer is a senior attorney and director of the Center for Academic Freedom with
Alliance Defending Freedom
(
@ADFLégal
).
window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({
appId : '190451957673826',
xfbml : true, version : 'v2.9' }); };
window.addEventListener('load', (event) => { (function(d, s, id){ var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)(0); if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); });