Why weren't University of Oklahoma students protected by the First Amendment?

[Bricker]

@get_lives

You seem to be confused about whether I was arguing a legal point. I couldn’t care less if their speech was protected. Western Europe is FAR more restrictive of hate speech, and their societies have somehow not devolved into dictatorships. I think we could safely curtail hate speech without losing any of the real intent of the First. You know the Founders’ intent was protecting citizens’ speech against the government, right?

That sounds like an interesting opinion, as opposed to a factual assertion to a factual question. To remind you, a factual question might look like: Why weren’t University of Oklahoma students protected by the First Amendment? This is a legal question, with a factual answer.

[Bricker]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

SCOTUS has long recognized that public high schools may punish students from speech on the basis of its content, apparently on the grounds that minors might hear naughty words. There were probably minors on the SAE bus.

What the hell is that weak tea?

The written statement from Boren clearly explains that the students were being expelled for “your leadership role in leading a racist and exclusionary chant which has created a hostile educational environment for others," and not the presence of minors, which is simply a speculation uninformed by any facts I’m aware of.

You’re better than that.

[Nars_Glinley]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I am not entirely convinced that this is “trampling the First Amendment”. Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason University is in some ways very much on point - that is, it involves a university sanctioning a fraternity over racist conduct. In others, it’s not. More particularly, it involved offensive but not threatening conduct.

Richard Parker correctly notes that the reference to “hanging a nigger from a tree” is not a “true threat” of the kind that falls outside the scope of the First Amendment. However, a university is not necessarily as constrained here as everyone seems to assume, and I think a university may be justified in punishing “untrue threats” where other government authorities are not. SCOTUS has long recognized that public high schools may punish students from speech on the basis of its content, apparently on the grounds that minors might hear naughty words. There were probably minors on the SAE bus. Beyond that, SCOTUS and lower courts seem to have trouble drawing bright lines between high school and university students in free speech cases.

For example:

Bolding and italicizing mine. Actually, I think it unlikely that there were any minors on the bus. It is unusual for someone to start college at the age of 17. To still be 17 by spring break of your freshman year would be quite rare. If this were a group solely of freshmen, you might find one but presumably this was a random sampling of college students and so roughly only 1/4th of them were freshmen. The chanters have also admitted that alcohol probably played a factor in their behavior. Providing alcohol to 17 year-olds (on a supposedly dry campus) would rival or even exceed their stupid chant on the “Asinine Behavior” chart.

[Dewey_Finn]

FYI, the two students who were expelled were 19 and 20 years old, so they were both underage when it comes to drinking.

[Nars_Glinley]

@Dewey_Finn

FYI, the two students who were expelled were 19 and 20 years old, so they were both underage when it comes to drinking.

I understand that. It has always been my impression (and nothing more than that) that giving alcohol to a 17 year old was a more serious offense than a 18 - 20 year old.

[ElvisL1ves]

A big state school would have to expel half the student body if they enforced that one.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

I was 16 when I started college (and joined a fraternity.) As far as providing alcohol goes, anyone who thinks underage students cannot obtain alcohol from fraternity brothers (or hell, any other 21+ student) is sadly out of touch with reality.

@Bricker

What the hell is that weak tea?

The written statement from Boren clearly explains that the students were being expelled for “your leadership role in leading a racist and exclusionary chant which has created a hostile educational environment for others," and not the presence of minors, which is simply a speculation uninformed by any facts I’m aware of.

You’re better than that.

I am aware that the university did not discipline the students because there were minors present. My point is that in the as-yet-hypothetical litigation over whether they could be expelled the university may argue that it has the authority to regulate speech because minors may be present at any given university function.

[Loach]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I am aware that the university did not discipline the students because there were minors present. My point is that in the as-yet-hypothetical litigation over whether they could be expelled the university may argue that it has the authority to regulate speech because minors may be present at any given university function.

It was off campus and the fraternity is not part of the university. I don’t see how you can call it a university function.

[Enola_Gay]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I was 16 when I started college (and joined a fraternity.) As far as providing alcohol goes, anyone who thinks underage students cannot obtain alcohol from fraternity brothers (or hell, any other 21+ student) is sadly out of touch with reality.

I am aware that the university did not discipline the students because there were minors present. My point is that in the as-yet-hypothetical litigation over whether they could be expelled the university may argue that it has the authority to regulate speech because minors may be present at any given university function.

There were minors who were not only present but actually participated in the Westboro Baptist Church anti-gay protests & I’m sure at many of the funerals they picketed with their hate speech. Yet the US Supreme still ruled 8:1 that their speech was protected by the First Amendment.

So while the university may argue that it has the authority to regulate speech, it seems they would not win in court.

[Dewey_Finn]

@Loach

It was off campus and the fraternity is not part of the university. I don’t see how you can call it a university function.

I don’t agree with that; fraternities are in a sort of intermediate state; not quite completely separate from the university and not quite fully part of the university.

[Lemmytheseal2]

@ZPG_Zealot

So I suppose if the frat boys recorded the chant with someone else doing the vocalization and played the recording outloud, you would be just fine with what they did?

Not at all, but I cannot imagine some student getting punished for listening privately to something that you might deem offensive. That’s what your statement implied.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@Lemmytheseal2

Not at all, but I cannot imagine some student getting punished for listening privately to something that you might deem offensive. That’s what your statement implied.

If someone else can hear it, it ceased to private. Unless the university strictly, strictly applies an earphones at all times rule there is no concept of listening privately on a college campus. Students sit outside on the lawn on sunny days blaring music from various sources. Dorms are notorious for their paper thin walls. And the libraries always have problems all the time enforcing quiet in the study cubicles.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

It was off campus and the fraternity is not part of the university. I don’t see how you can call it a university function.

The fraternity is part of the university. Greek-letter organizations are explicitly recognized and regulated by OU, as is the rule at most (though certainly not all) campuses.

[Lemmytheseal2]

@ZPG_Zealot

If someone else can hear it, it ceased to private. Unless the university strictly, strictly applies an earphones at all times rule there is no concept of listening privately on a college campus. Students sit outside on the lawn on sunny days blaring music from various sources. Dorms are notorious for their paper thin walls. And the libraries always have problems all the time enforcing quiet in the study cubicles.

This is silly. The contexts are vastly different.

[get_lives]

I have a few questions for all you First Amendment citers in the thread:

1. If YOU had gotten caught doing this and were expelled (assuming for the moment you are college-aged NOW) would you sue?

2. If your CHILD had gotten caught and expelled, would you recommend they sue the university?

3. Would you hire either of these two students for a high profile position that required tact, judgment, and the ability to deal with people of different cultures and backgrounds?

[friedo]

@get_lives

I have a few questions for all you First Amendment citers in the thread:

1. If YOU had gotten caught doing this and were expelled (assuming for the moment you are college-aged NOW) would you sue?

2. If your CHILD had gotten caught and expelled, would you recommend they sue the university?

3. Would you hire either of these two students for a high profile position that required tact, judgment, and the ability to deal with people of different cultures and backgrounds?

What relevance do any of these questions have to the subject of the thread?

[Laggard]

@davida03801

Colleges and universities only wish to allow speech they approve of. Speech they do not approve of is immediately shut down, or you’re not even allowed on campus to give the speech.
.

Besides the KKK and the American Nazi Party, is there anyone that approves of lynching black people?

[get_lives]

@friedo

What relevance do any of these questions have to the subject of the thread?

I’m hoping for the opportunity to make the point that there’s no real need for such a huge gap between what the law allows versus what is actually useful for society on a macro and micro level. I’m not saying I want there to be NO gap, but…what’s the point in giving these two kids so much room to end their careers before they start? An object lesson for others? The people wise enough to learn that lesson from watching it happen are wise enough not to NEED it.

[Nars_Glinley]

@get_lives

I have a few questions for all you First Amendment citers in the thread:

1. If YOU had gotten caught doing this and were expelled (assuming for the moment you are college-aged NOW) would you sue?

2. If your CHILD had gotten caught and expelled, would you recommend they sue the university?

3. Would you hire either of these two students for a high profile position that required tact, judgment, and the ability to deal with people of different cultures and backgrounds?

The answer to each of these irrelevant questions is no.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Ditto. Well, I might require the college to return my tuition payments for the semester.

@Enola_Gay

There were minors who were not only present but actually participated in the Westboro Baptist Church anti-gay protests & I’m sure at many of the funerals they picketed with their hate speech. Yet the US Supreme still ruled 8:1 that their speech was protected by the First Amendment.

Is Westboro Baptist Church a university?