Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (7) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84357 
Subject: Re: *NAZI! NAZI! Parade!*
Date: 10/22/24 2:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 7
UCLA antisemitism task force says the university prioritized free speech over stopping protests, which were among the most violent of the pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations

My sympathies are not with the protestors, but it is important to note that UCLA (and University of Washington) probably have to prioritize free speech over stopping protests.

Unlike private schools like Columbia, these are public schools. They are government actors. They can't censor students' speech in general, even when that speech is hateful.

They can adopt content-neutral time, place and manner restrictions on student speech and protests - but they can't just step in and stop protests just because they don't like the content of the protests, even if the content is terrible. Even if the groups involved and the content is linked to violence, but does not meet the Brandenberg standard. From the SCOTUS decision of Healy v. James:

Yet the precedents of this Court leave no room for the view that, because of the acknowledged need for order, First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large. Quite to the contrary, "[t]he vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools." Shelton v. Tucker, 364 U. S. 479, 364 U. S. 487 (1960). The college classroom, with its surrounding environs, is peculiarly the "marketplace of ideas,'" and we break no new constitutional ground in reaffirming this Nation's dedication to safeguarding academic Page freedom. Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U. S. 589, 385 U. S. 603 (1967); Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U. S. 234, 354 U. S. 249-250 (1957) (plurality opinion of Mr. Chief Justice Warren), 262 (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result).

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/408/16...

I find the more extreme campus protests odious, and some of the messaging to be horrible. But state schools are very limited in their ability to prevent students from speaking based on the content of their speech.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (7) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community