June 13, 2003 11:51 AM

Free speech and higher education- is it mutually exclusive??

Lawsuit claims Tech curbing free speech: UH group's lawyers spar in Lubbock

Do colleges and universities have an interest in regulating free speech? Can free speech and free political expression exist within an institution of higher learning without compromising that institution's educational mission? It's a tough question, virtually impossible to answer, and yet colleges and universities across the nation are (still, after all these years) trying to strike a balance. Recognizing that some issues, such as abortion, are so volatile that the potential for divisiveness is quite high, some institutions have for years tightly regulated organized political expression on campus. The question, then, is what sort of speech is acceptable- and who is empowered to make those decisions? How is that line drawn, and who draws it? More importantly, does the very act of regulating speech on campus qualify as a violation of someone's First Amendment rights? It's a riddle, wrapped in an enigma, surrounded by a quandary. I'm just glad I'm not the one having to tapdance through that minefield.

It would seem that a strict interpretation of the First Amendment would require colleges and universities to allow the free expression of all viewpoints (short of actively advocating for violence, I suppose). Yet the primary mission of a college or university is to provide an atmosphere that fosters learning. Does being confronted with photographs of aborted fetuses while walking across campus contribute to a positive learning environment? Or can an argument be made that this sort of political expression creates a hostile environment? If so, what sort of regulation is possible (or appropriate)?

Of course, the only way to be truly consistent would be to ban (or allow) ALL forms of political expression on campus, and no one with a grip on reality would seriously suggest this as an option. What would seem possible would be to allow the speech while regulating the behavior used in expressing it. Of course, this is not exactly a bullet-proof solution, but it might be a step in the right direction. Again, though, who decides where that line is drawn?

LUBBOCK -- Texas Tech University's free speech policy violates students' constitutional rights by restricting where they may speak and requiring permission to speak elsewhere, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday by two civil liberties groups.

The suit claims the one location that Tech designates as a free-speech zone -- a 20-foot-wide gazebo that can hold about 40 people -- and a policy that requires a permit for speech at other campus locations are restrictive and violate students' rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

The restrictions are on their face "overbroad, involve content-based and viewpoint discrimination and unconstitutionally restrict student speech," according to the suit filed by Liberty Legal Institute of Plano and the Alliance Defense Fund of Scottsdale, Ariz.

The suit was filed in Lubbock federal court in cooperation with The Foundation for Individual Rights, a Philadelphia group that targets speech policies at higher education institutions that they allege are unconstitutional.

"They are using a machete rather than a surgeon's scalpel," said Kevin Theriot, an attorney with the Arizona group. "When it comes to free speech you have to be very precise in the way you regulate."

The Phoenix group also represented students who sued the University of Houston, where on Wednesday officials said they will eliminate some restrictions on campus speech and pay $93,000 in attorneys' fees to settle an anti-abortion student group's lawsuit. The school will amend its free speech policy by June 30.

"Universities are not black holes where only orthodox views are allowed to shine," Benjamin Bull, an attorney representing the Pro-Life Cougars student group and who works for the Alliance Defense Fund, told the Houston Chronicle for Thursday editions. "Students are entitled to learn the truth about all difficult issues, including abortion."

Of course, "learning the truth" depends on which side of the ideological fence you happen to occupy. Too often, people purporting to represent "the truth" are simply grinding their own personal ax. That is their right, but to present their point of view as "the truth" is the height of arrogance and overtly deceptive. How about simply providing information and then assuming that people are intelligent and capable of drawing their own conclusions?

This issue would not even BE an issue if people and groups would rely less on "the truth" than on presenting information and alternatives. We ARE talking about institutions of higher learning, after all, where critical thinking is a valued commodity (or so I hear). The dilemma that colleges and universities are wrestling with is that one man's "truth" is another's heresy. This question wasn't resolved in the '60s, it was controversial during my college days in the '80s, and it likely isn't going to be solved now.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on June 13, 2003 11:51 AM.

Summer arrives was the previous entry in this blog.

Another day in Paradise is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 5.12