Students are held to high standards under the codes of conduct implemented in schools across the country. With the goal of ensuring students’ safety and education, these codes often blur the lines of the First Amendment rights guaranteed to all citizens. Alienating or insulting a peer with a different opinion, publishing stories in a school newspaper that are unapproved by administration, and spreading harmful rumors are all prohibited on campus. However, aren’t these types of speech protected by the first amendment? Must students relinquish their rights in order to pursue an education?
Over the decades, the American perspective on students' rights has changed drastically, from the era where children must be seen and not heard to the present day, where rallies on campus are a constant example of students exercising their rights.
Over the decades, the American perspective on students' rights has changed drastically, from the era where children must be seen and not heard to the present day, where rallies on campus are a constant example of students exercising their rights.
The Birth of the Movement
Above is a series of news clips about the free speech movement at UC Berkeley. It includes riots, sit-ins, and other forms of civil disobedience common during the time.
"Free Speech Movement." Performance by Joan Baez et al. Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley, KCRA TV. Center for Sacramento History, archive.org/details/casacsh_000097. Accessed 21 Sept. 2017. |
Student Protesters at UC Berkeley, 1964
Student Protesters Holding a Sign. 1964. Students for a Democratic Society, 1964, studentantiwar.blogs.brynmawr.edu/stories-from-the-frontlines/frountline-in-usa/movements-that-inspire-us-berkeley-free-speech/. Accessed 12 Jan. 2018. |
Where it is Now
UC, Roiled by 1st Amendment Controversies, to Launch National Free Speech Center
Amid rising questions of the amount of coverage that free speech should provide, the University of California has declared its intentions to base the National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement at its Washington D.C. center. It will also sponsor up to eight fellows per year to research the changing views on free speech, especially on campus.
“There have been more serious issues about the 1st Amendment on campuses today than perhaps at any time since the free speech movement,” UC President Janet Napolitano said in an interview. “The students themselves are raising questions about free speech and does it apply to homophobic speech, does it apply to racist speech? We have to consider the student concerns but return to basic principles about what free speech means and how do we better educate students about the extent of the 1st Amendment.”
Amid rising questions of the amount of coverage that free speech should provide, the University of California has declared its intentions to base the National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement at its Washington D.C. center. It will also sponsor up to eight fellows per year to research the changing views on free speech, especially on campus.
“There have been more serious issues about the 1st Amendment on campuses today than perhaps at any time since the free speech movement,” UC President Janet Napolitano said in an interview. “The students themselves are raising questions about free speech and does it apply to homophobic speech, does it apply to racist speech? We have to consider the student concerns but return to basic principles about what free speech means and how do we better educate students about the extent of the 1st Amendment.”
Student protesters at the University of Florida on October 19, 2017.
Forbes, 20 Nov. 2017, www.forbes.com/sites/carolinesimon/2017/11/20/free-speech-isnt-free-its-costing-college-campuses-millions/#31b0eeea1ee7. Accessed 7 Dec. 2017. |
A student giving a speech on campus in 1965.
Photograph of the Free Speech Platform. 2 May 1965. Calisphere University of California, California Digital Library, calisphere.org/item/ark:/13030/c8w094xr/. Accessed 21 Sept. 2017. |
University of Wisconsin Approves Free Speech Policy that Punishes Student Protesters
The discussion on counter-protesters has reached a head in the University of Washington. It is the opinion of many that counter-protesting poses a danger to the free speech of others.
"University of Wisconsin System leaders approved a policy Friday that calls for suspending and expelling students who disrupt campus speeches and presentations, saying students need to listen to all sides of issues and arguments.
"The Board of Regents adopted the language on a voice vote during a meeting at the University of Wisconsin-Stout in Menomonie. The policy states that students found to have twice engaged in violence or other disorderly conduct that disrupts others' free speech would be suspended. Students found to have disrupted others' free expression three times would be expelled."
The discussion on counter-protesters has reached a head in the University of Washington. It is the opinion of many that counter-protesting poses a danger to the free speech of others.
"University of Wisconsin System leaders approved a policy Friday that calls for suspending and expelling students who disrupt campus speeches and presentations, saying students need to listen to all sides of issues and arguments.
"The Board of Regents adopted the language on a voice vote during a meeting at the University of Wisconsin-Stout in Menomonie. The policy states that students found to have twice engaged in violence or other disorderly conduct that disrupts others' free speech would be suspended. Students found to have disrupted others' free expression three times would be expelled."
Students' Rights in Court Cases
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District
This case, argued in November 1968 and decided in February 1969, set a higher standard for the amount of free speech that a student can expect in school. It maintained that the rights of students don't stop at the schoolhouse gate. The following is the official syllabus of the Supreme Court meeting:
"Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They sought nominal damages and an injunction against a regulation that the respondents had promulgated banning the wearing of armbands. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court. Held:
1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. Pp. 505-506.
2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. Pp. 506-507.
3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 507-514."
This case, argued in November 1968 and decided in February 1969, set a higher standard for the amount of free speech that a student can expect in school. It maintained that the rights of students don't stop at the schoolhouse gate. The following is the official syllabus of the Supreme Court meeting:
"Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam. They sought nominal damages and an injunction against a regulation that the respondents had promulgated banning the wearing of armbands. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities. The Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, affirmed by an equally divided court. Held:
1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. Pp. 505-506.
2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. Pp. 506-507.
3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 507-514."
Congress Finds Consensus on Free Speech on Campus
The following quote is the opening statement of Representative Val Demings, an African American Democrat from Florida. This took place during the hearing held by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to discuss challenges to freedom of speech on campuses. To watch the three-hour, unabridged trial, click here.
The following quote is the opening statement of Representative Val Demings, an African American Democrat from Florida. This took place during the hearing held by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to discuss challenges to freedom of speech on campuses. To watch the three-hour, unabridged trial, click here.
I've taken three oaths in my lifetime: one as a young police officer in 1984, another when I was sworn in as the police chief, and a third when I was sworn in to serve in the 105th session of the U.S. House of Representatives. In each oath I swore that I would protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.
I have taken each oath very seriously. As a law enforcement officer I had several occasions to provide security for groups as they exercised their first amendment rights, groups like the Klu Klux Klan and the neo-Nazi movement. There I was providing much needed protection, and if someone or anyone had tried to harm them in any way I would have risked my life to protect them, not because I agreed with their speech, but because I agreed with their right to speak, their right as guaranteed by the First Amendment.
...
Mr. Chairman, public safety trumps everything. For students like Taylor, the issue of free speech on college campuses isn't a right or left issue. Rather it's about criminal acts being wrapped in banners of free speech. It is knowing that the symbols and banners of 400 years of torture and terror are enough to strike fear in the hearts of every student of color. As we examine the issue of free speech on college campuses, let’s keep the focus on addressing the real danger which are any acts of violence, to threaten, intimidate, harass, or violate any laws that this nation holds quite dear."
Free Speech or Hate Speech? Debates on Campus.
Free Speech or Hate Speech? Campus Debates over Victimhood put Universities in a Bind.
Many universities are embroiled in the debate on whether there should be limits to hate speech. Some see hate speech as a threat to the health and wellbeing to minorities, while others believe that this threat is less important than the threat to the overall freedom of speech, should hate speech be limited.
"[Abdulhadi's] face, and the names of her students, again plastered all over campus below these words: “TERRORIST SUPPORTERS.”
Abdulhadi is San Francisco State University’s sole Arab Muslim professor teaching at its College of Ethnic Studies. She is a frequent target of right-wing groups because of her criticism of Israel.
While there is no evidence that the posters’ message has any validity, Abdulhadi was incensed, and she looked to the university to do something about it. University administrators, however, said the posters’ makers were entitled to free speech.
“I am 100 percent in favor of the First Amendment,” said Abdulhadi, a short 62-year-old with cropped hair and an Arabic accent. “It’s a question of when does speech become an incitement to violence?”
The nation’s colleges are facing growing pressure to redefine the limits of free speech in an age of resurgent white supremacists and amid pleas for inclusiveness on increasingly diverse campuses. For some students and professors, suppressing hate speech has become more important than protecting the values enshrined by the First Amendment."
Many universities are embroiled in the debate on whether there should be limits to hate speech. Some see hate speech as a threat to the health and wellbeing to minorities, while others believe that this threat is less important than the threat to the overall freedom of speech, should hate speech be limited.
"[Abdulhadi's] face, and the names of her students, again plastered all over campus below these words: “TERRORIST SUPPORTERS.”
Abdulhadi is San Francisco State University’s sole Arab Muslim professor teaching at its College of Ethnic Studies. She is a frequent target of right-wing groups because of her criticism of Israel.
While there is no evidence that the posters’ message has any validity, Abdulhadi was incensed, and she looked to the university to do something about it. University administrators, however, said the posters’ makers were entitled to free speech.
“I am 100 percent in favor of the First Amendment,” said Abdulhadi, a short 62-year-old with cropped hair and an Arabic accent. “It’s a question of when does speech become an incitement to violence?”
The nation’s colleges are facing growing pressure to redefine the limits of free speech in an age of resurgent white supremacists and amid pleas for inclusiveness on increasingly diverse campuses. For some students and professors, suppressing hate speech has become more important than protecting the values enshrined by the First Amendment."