Let’s remember the calendar. The college could rescind tomorrow. Testing the legal validity will take years,during which time the rescinded students will not be attending the university. This is not an issue that I’d fall on the sword for. Perhaps the OP’skid feels differently. Choices sometimes have consequences.
I still don’t see what the benefit of the group is to OP’s daughter. She doesn’t post, she doesn’t like what she’s reading, no one is giving her extra points for being part of the chat. Why stay? There is only downside, no upside.
Definitely accurate, but from a practical matter, there ain’t a whole lotta offensive speech that would be protected. Wouldn’t most (all?) of the 'isms be proper cause for rejection/rescissions/dismissal. Other than venting about the opposing political party and the one percenters, what’s left?
I’d be more concerned if this wasn’t a state school. Private schools can rescind based on speech. A state school would face a likely be advised by counsel not to rescind.
As for this “Definitely accurate, but from a practical matter, there ain’t a whole lotta offensive speech that would be protected. Wouldn’t most (all?) of the 'isms be proper cause for rejection/rescissions/dismissal. Other than venting about the opposing political party and the one percenters…”
PLEASE people try to understand the Constitution! Almost ALL OFFENSIVE SPEECH IS PROTECTED unless it involves harassment directed expressly at an individual or threats of violence.
None of what the OP is talking about is unprotected.
“wouldn’t that be the same as claiming that not allowing students to shout throughout lectures or labs at public universities also violates their freedom of speech?”
No, I don’t think so. How does this meme page impede the core functions of the university?
“@Hanna You’re the legal expert, not I, but wouldn’t that be the same as claiming that not allowing students to shout throughout lectures or labs at public universities also violates their freedom of speech”
As another lawyer, I’ll answer. No. It is not the same. A “time and place” restriction to abate noise is in limited circumstances permissible. But IMPORTANTLY notice the CONTENT of the speech is not an issue. The rule applies whether the kid is shouting “Everbody is Equal “ or White Power Now!
Here the issue is the content of the speech. And except for speech considered true harassment or threats of violence or REAL incitement to violence ( a very narrow category ) a public university cannot punish based on the content of speech. Period.
The lack of knowledge surrounding First Amendment rights makes me want to weep sometimes.
And posting ‘White Power Now’ on a college-sponsored forum would be cause for discipline at a college. Sure, the student might win a free speech case after winding thru the courts in 2-3 years, but from a practical standpoint it aint’ acceptable.
I’ve gotten an injunction against public school discipline that was a free speech violation in a matter of days. It was the school who had to decide if they wanted to continue to fight. They didn’t. The matter settled with my client getting money too.
In any event, It’s the postings here about what supposedly isn’t protected speech that really makes me sad. Of course “ who cares” when it’s speech we all find distasteful. But it is dangerous for so many to be so ill informed about their constitutional rights.
Born the USA, and left after 2nd grade, came back to do my PhD decades later. Surprisingly, public schools in Israel do not provide very many classes on the Constitution.
Regardless of potential first amendment issues or litigation or what the college does or does not do, participation in something unsavory of this nature may have consequences later in others’ opinion of the participant.
@MWolf. I don’t expect someone not raised in the US to understand US Constutional issues but then again I don’t expect for them to declare “ this isn’t a free speech issue” the way you did if they don’t know whether it is or not. And repeatedly on this site I see people posting statements like:
-
A university isn’t a government body so it has no First Amendment obligations.
WRONG if it’s a public university OR a private university in California which by state law applies the First Amendment to private schools. That’s why I don’t think you’d see Stanford doing what Harvard did. -
If it’s “hate speech” it isn’t protected.
WRONG. Several court cases note that so long as the speech wasn’t intended to be directed at an individual and thus not “ harassing” or violence threatening its fully protected.
-
As long as the government body isn’t throwing you in jail, there’s no protection.
WRONG. The First Amendment prevents the government from punishing you for speech. Any kind of punishment. -
If the University has rules that you sign or agree to in order to attend that you won’t engage in certain behavior they can punish you for speech. After all you “ waived” your rights.
WRONG. The government can’t require you to waive your rights in order to participate in some program or school. The only exception is for those that get paid by the government for work or those in our armed services including service academies.
Not ‘just her generation’. It’s a small part of it, and one that several of us from the same generation decide not to be a part of. It’s really not so hard to walk out of a group chat where things you don’t agree with are going on.
@maya54 Hey, I’m an academic by training - by law we are not allowed to voice an opinion unless it sounds like we’re stating a fact. It’s in the Handbook of every graduate school in the world.
OP: I see very little to gain, and a whole lot to lose, by having your daughter continue to be a part of the group chat. I would start a smaller, more private, more appropriate group chat with some carefully chosen people.
@Mwolf. I’m not sure what you mean. What law? Or is it just a university rule ( that’s not a law). And Do you mean as a paid employee of the university ( i.e., the government)? Do you mean while at your job? As I said above in 4), paid employment by the government runs under a different set of rules. But you need to explain more what you mean.
@maya54 Dude, I wasn’t being serious. Of course there’s not any law like that - it’s just how academics are.