Curtailed Speech Is Not Free Speech
On Constitution Day, a Modesto Junior College student was banned from handing out copies of the Constitution. View through to the administrator telling him he can't have a date to exercise his free speech for many weeks, and even then, he will have to do it in a tiny spot outside the student center -- and only there.
Video from theFIRE.org:
The writeup:
Published on Sep 19, 2013 Modesto Junior College in California told a student that he could not pass out copies of the United States Constitution outside the student center on September 17, 2013--Constitution Day. Captured on video, college police and administrators demanded that Robert Van Tuinen stop passing out Constitution pamphlets and told him that he would only be allowed to pass them out in the college's tiny free speech zone, and only after scheduling it several days or weeks ahead of time.
And the good news -- another victory for free speech by campus free speech defenders, FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education:
FRESNO, Calif., February 25, 2014--Yesterday evening, California's Modesto Junior College (MJC) agreed to settle a First Amendment lawsuit filed last October by student Robert Van Tuinen, whom the college prevented from handing out copies of the Constitution on Constitution Day. The videotaped incident drew national media attention.As part of the settlement, MJC has revised its policies to allow free speech in open areas across campus and has agreed to pay Van Tuinen $50,000. Van Tuinen was represented by the firm of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP in Washington, D.C., and assisted by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).
"FIRE is very pleased that Robert Van Tuinen and Modesto Junior College have reached this settlement--and that Modesto Junior College students will now be able to exercise their First Amendment rights across campus," said FIRE President Greg Lukianoff. "But because 59% of colleges nationwide maintain policies that clearly and substantially restrict student speech, there's much more work to be done."
Last September 17--the 226th anniversary of the Constitution's signing--MJC prevented Van Tuinen from handing out copies of the Constitution in a grassy area by the student center. Van Tuinen notified FIRE about the situation, and FIRE promptly wrote MJC, asking the college to rescind its unconstitutional policies. With no satisfactory response forthcoming, on October 10, with FIRE's assistance, Bob Corn-Revere, Ronald London, and Lisa Zycherman of Davis Wright Tremaine filed a federal lawsuit on Van Tuinen's behalf. On December 17, MJC agreed to suspend enforcement of the policies in question while settlement talks took place.
Late yesterday, both parties signed a settlement agreement that awards Van Tuinen $50,000 and reflects three new policies that open up the campus to free expression.
... Free expression is rightfully now allowed in all "areas generally available to students and the community," which include "grassy areas, walkways, and other similar common areas." The settlement also prohibits MJC from reverting to the policies that were in place when Van Tuinen's right to distribute the Constitution to his fellow students was denied.







The idiocy will continue until those responsible are held personally liable. The taxpayers paid that $50,000.
MarkD at February 28, 2014 4:22 AM
A. A public institution should have no right to infringe upon the rights of the citizens who patronize it.
B. Campus 'police' are not police, they're the campus equivalent to mall cops.
C. As an American citizen, our collective 'free speech zone' is every bit of public land from one end of the country to another, to include public institutions.
Robert at February 28, 2014 4:31 AM
Campus 'police' are not police
That depends on the campus police force. The one my employer has is accredited, and has arrest authority as well as firearms, and I'm guessing tasers.
As an American citizen, our collective 'free speech zone' is every bit of public land from one end of the country to another, to include public institutions.
Does that include my office, which is owned by a public institution? how about the classrooms our faculty and students teach in? during class.
You're welcome to try and conduct your free speech in my office. Do not be surprised if I seize you by the scruff of your neck and escort you to the door and give you a brief introduction to the sidewalk.
Maybe I should see that as an opportunity to allow you to ramble on about whatever for however long you want, get no work done, and yet get paid for it.
But which would give me better job satisfaction? I'm guessing if I let you ramble on you'd gripe about the lazy public employees who do no work. There is just no satisfying some people.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 28, 2014 6:23 AM
Free expression is rightfully now allowed in all "areas generally available to students and the community," which include "grassy areas, walkways, and other similar common areas."
This seems a reasonable definition to me.
I remember college classes in rooms with no A/C (neat, historic old buildings that surrounded "the quad"), windows open, listening to lectures while the crazy dude in sandals screeched whatever craziness he needed to share with the world. It made me slightly uncomfortable to walk by him on the way to class, and sometimes the teacher had to stop for a few seconds when the screeching peaked. But looking back, I don't feel harmed by being exposed to it. The opposite, in fact: it was one of my earliest exposures to something resembling the un-neat, un-ordered, un-organized real world.
I don't understand why colleges these days feel the need to suppress that. What problem are they trying to solve?
flbeachmom at February 28, 2014 8:11 AM
"I don't understand why colleges these days feel the need to suppress that. What problem are they trying to solve?"
Univerities do not exist today to educate. They exist to indoctrinate, and to hand out golden tickets to those they deem worthy.
Cousin Dave at February 28, 2014 8:36 AM
One summer at college I fell in with the Lyndon LaRouche people. Cheaper than drugs, I guess.
Sosij at February 28, 2014 10:05 AM
Mark D: "The idiocy will continue until those responsible are held personally liable. The taxpayers paid that $50,000."
You are absolutely right. And the taxpayers (and voters) should keep on paying until they're motivated enough to dump politicians who pass laws that enable this kind of nonsense, and dump those who don't pass laws that prohibit it and hold those responsible personally liable.
Ken R at March 1, 2014 8:17 PM
Leave a comment