What speech will justify expulsion next?
As disgusting as their video was, they should sue. This is a very bad precedent.
[Update in the afternoon]
More: “…as for the people in the comments who say that libertarians like me, Eugene Volokh, and FIRE shouldn’t be defending these students: If you only defend speech you agree with, you’re not a free speech advocate, you’re just a partisan hack.”
Yuppers. I hope they sue Boren’s ass off.
Apparently they were doing a popular rap song. So like at ou, the rappers and blacks can sing along but nobody else can. Nice constitution you have there. It’d be a shame if anything happened to it. Cheers –
No, the house mother that had a video turn up later was doing a rap song. But the original video includes a line about “lynching them if you want”.
Bob Clark
Eugene Volokh isn’t building much of a case by sighting hypothetical examples of hate speech, and claiming students expressing support for an organisation using hate speech is equivalent to those students participating in hate speech.
I could give a hell of a lot of examples of people expressing overall support for this or that organisation or country but still condemning specific actions by said organisation or country, eg. supporters of Israel who condemn the recent action that killed hundreds of Gaza residents, Republicans who condemn Obama on almost everything but not with regard to this or that.
Eugene Volokh isn’t building much of a case by sighting hypothetical examples
Andrew, are you a legal scholar? You don’t appear to be based on the statement I copied.
So you admit that AGW is a threat because climate scientists say it is?
One lawyer arguing a position doesn’t make it right.
I’ll stick with the point I’ve made: the analogies he’s drawn aren’t analogies, they’re not cases of students themselves taking part in hate speech.
So you admit that AGW is a threat because climate scientists say it is?
No
One lawyer arguing a position doesn’t make it right.
I didn’t say it did.
I’ll make this point: legal scholars always argue using hypotheticals. It is what they do. It is pretty funny reading you complain about it, and I see others find the same amusement.
Well, that is how Professor Volojh is much, much smarter than either you or I. As a law scholar, he cites hypothetical examples rather than sights them . . .
You really need to spend time on a campus. These hypotheticals are the daily standard.
Examples of students themselves taking part in hate speech not being an issue for the university? Perhaps you have examples of “kill the Jews” being chanted by some students, or “burn the crackas”?
The real question is whether or not a university has the right to expel students that bring that university into disrepute, as an employer would if employees, on a company trip or event did the same.
The issue of whether or not these students were on a university bus trip is important, I’m assuming they were, I suspect Volojh would have written up a much stronger case if they had been doing this in their own time and space.
The real question is whether or not a university has the right to expel students that bring that university into disrepute, as an employer would if employees, on a company trip or event did the same.
Only if it’s private, not if it’s publicly funded.
By that argument police officers should never be fired if they opened express racist attitudes.
Bob Clark
You see no distinction between a law-enforcement officer and a college student?
These certainly document hatred of certain groups:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=antisemite+campus
http://www.thefire.org/category/cases/religious-liberty/
The argument was a public university should abide by freedom of speech rules. Then public employees should also. IF you accept that argument as valid.
Bob Clark
A public university can fire employees for speech. It can’t expel students.
Then there is this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/charles-jacobs-and-ilya-feoktistov/campus-free-speech-for-jew-haters-only/
Maybe buried in youtube there’s something supporting your claim, I had a look through some of the stuff that came up, but did not find a case of a university ignoring anti white or antisemitic stunts or speech by students on campus, opposing Israeli government policy is not antisemitism. One of your links started with this:
“Two weeks ago in Boston, Northeastern University suspended a student group — Students for Justice in Palestine (NU SJP) — for an assortment of infractions against Jewish students and those who support Israel.”
That’s exactly what I’m arguing, that the universities don’t let off antisemite and antiwhite hate speech but punishing anti black hate speech.
It only took law suits to allow some of these groups to exist. That is definitely bigotry.
Israel must burn was one sign I remember.
I should also point out that when I went back to my Alma (not very) Mater, the student union had a foot washing room. I also noticed that there wasn’t a chapel.
“Perhaps you have examples of “kill the Jews””
Fairly similar comments have actually been expressed on campus by people belonging to the Democrats BDS campaign.
The award for biggest hippocrite and no-nothing talking head needs to go to a CNN contributor last night (it was on in the gym, so I didn’t get his name): “Yes, they deserved to be kicked out. Universities are supposed to be places that welcome to all people.”
So, if I understand, Universities are supposed to be welcoming “all people”, but kick out those who may say some un-appealing things? Don’t think you thought this one through all the way.,
Only a know-nothing would spell it “no-nothing.”
A comment on the update:
Agree it does look like Boren could and should be be in the gun for not following the correct process.