Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by cmn32480 on Sunday May 07 2017, @07:06PM   Printer-friendly
from the when-the-First-Amendment-isn't-clear-enough dept.

NPR reports:

On college campuses, outrage over provocative speakers sometimes turns violent.

It's becoming a pattern on campuses around the country. A speaker is invited, often by a conservative student group. Other students oppose the speaker, and maybe they protest. If the speech happens, the speaker is heckled. Sometimes there's violence.

In other cases — as with conservative commentator Ann Coulter at the University of California, Berkeley last week — the event is called off.

Now, a handful of states, including Illinois, Tennessee, Colorado and Arizona, have passed or introduced legislation designed to prevent these incidents from happening. The bills differ from state to state, but they're generally based on a model written by the Goldwater Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Arizona.

The model bill would require public universities to remain neutral on political issues, prevent them from disinviting speakers, and impose penalties for students and others who interfere with these speakers.

The author of the model bill argues that the neutrality stipulation is necessary for public institutions funded by tax dollars, "who shouldn't be forced to subsidize speech that they disagree with." In response to the legislation, a Democratic North Carolina legislator criticized the bill as an unnecessary "regulation of a constitutional right." The story also mentions that "Critics say this kind of legislation could hinder a university's ability to regulate hate speech on campus," but the bill author responds that hate speech is "not well-defined in the law."

Although the proposed legislation varies by state, the model bill linked above recommends a number of initiatives, from clear campus policies on protecting free speech to severe disciplinary actions for students who interfere with that right. Perhaps the strongest section of the model bill would require that "Any student who has twice been found responsible for infringing the expressive rights of others will be suspended for a minimum of one year, or expelled" (Section 1.9).

In other free speech news, USA Today reports that the FCC is launching an investigation into an "obscene" joke by Stephen Colbert concerning Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, which caused a Twitter firestorm and led to a trending #FireColbert hashtag. While the joke was sexually explicit, the offensive word was bleeped in broadcast. CNN has argued that the FCC is merely doing its job in investigating "a number" of complaints, but Slate notes the high legal threshold that would be necessary for a fine in this case, given the late hour of the broadcast and the three-pronged test for obscenity.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @12:22AM (4 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @12:22AM (#506073) Journal

    But why oh why do the Young Republicans insist on trying to invite the very enemies of academe into the heart of the campus?

    Where else would they invite them? That's where the lecture hall space is after all. Needless to say, I'm not seeing the problem here. Being an enemy of academe is not that big a deal.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:35AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:35AM (#506176)

    Spoken like a truly ignorant fool. History shows your place, and it is in the footnotes where they mention that some close minded fools tried to maintain the status quo because they fear change.

    When your kind makes it into the main pages it is overwhelmingly about the persecutions and genocides of those you don't like. Good job graduating the *youth* academy /s

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @06:52AM (2 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @06:52AM (#506222) Journal
      Ok, so now you're claiming so-called "enemies of academe" engage in persecution and genocide. Except of course, they don't. There's no genocide going on in the US and the persecutions are all by parties keeping them from speaking on a college campus. That's very Orwellian. Maybe you're just a little mixed up on who is actually an enemy of academe?

      For the record, this supposed law sounds like a terrible idea. And of a nature that runs counter to libertarianism.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:54AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:54AM (#506236)

        There's no genocide going on in the US

        What about the White Genocide that is taking place right here in the United States, khallow? White people are dying every day, and no one cares! They are dying in ATV accidents, in Monster Truck Accidents, in drunk accidents, in home wiring accidents, in "I thought it was unloaded" accidents, and in "I didn't know she was married" accidents! It is a veritable genocide of white trash, I am telling you! And you think we don't need to do something about it? I myself just ran over two white Meth addicts on my way home! And I had to shoot an opiod addict that was trying to steal my laundry soap! White dude! So tell us, khallow, who is the enemy of academe, in the face of a white genocide? At this rate, pretty soon there will be no stupid white people left!

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @12:51PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @12:51PM (#506322) Journal
          What was the point of that?