果冻传媒app官方

Table of Contents

NKU Punishes Vigilante Censorship, but Its Speech Code Remains

The president of Northern Kentucky University has acted commendably in response to a serious threat to the free speech rights of students. Last week, NKU professor Sally Jacobsen erected by the university鈥檚 right-to-life student organization. indicate that Professor Jacobsen actually took part in the destruction as well.

In a , university president James Votruba announced today that 鈥淧rofessor Jacobsen has been removed from her remaining classes and placed on leave from the University.鈥 He stated that Jacobsen鈥檚 鈥渁ctions were inconsistent with Northern Kentucky University's commitment to free and open debate and the opportunity for all sides to be heard without threat of censorship or reprisal,鈥 and reaffirmed 鈥渁 commitment to the importance of free speech and inquiry as a hallmark of our University.鈥 FIREcommends President Votruba and the university for acting so quickly, decisively and publicly in support of its students鈥 right to free speech. Such actions are sadly in short supply at today鈥檚 universities, and NKU deserves praise for demonstrating a commitment to the freedoms of speech and expression that are so crucial to university life.

Unfortunately, as , NKU has several speech codes that are inconsistent with its demonstrated commitment to free speech, codes that earn NKU a 鈥渞ed light鈥 rating on FIRE鈥檚 Spotlight.

prohibit 鈥渕aking an offensive coarse utterance, gesture or display,鈥 as well as 鈥渁nnoying鈥 another person. As has been explained in cases too numerous to mention, however, it is unconstitutional for a public university such as NKU to suppress free speech on the grounds that it is subjectively offensive to some listener. As one federal appellate court recently put it, there is 鈥渘o question that the free speech clause protects a wide variety of speech that listeners may consider deeply offensive鈥.鈥 Saxe v. State College Area School District, 240 F.3d 200, 206 (3d Cir. 2001). The U.S. Department of Education even wrote to colleges and universities in 2003 specifically to clarify that harassment 鈥渕ust include something beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols or thoughts that some person finds offensive.鈥

NKU also maintains a that provides that 鈥淸a]ll posters, flyers, handbills and banners must be authorized and stamped by the Dean of FIREdesignate.鈥 This regulation is an impermissible prior restraint on free speech, because it gives administrators unfettered discretion to refuse permission to students who wish to engage in expression through the distribution of leaflets, handbills, or flyers. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, 鈥渁 law subjecting the exercise of First Amendment freedoms to the prior restraint of a license, without narrow, objective, and definite standards to guide the licensing authority, is unconstitutional.鈥 Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 394 U.S. 147, 150鈥151 (1969). NKU鈥檚 posting policy, which requires a 鈥渓icense鈥 from the university in that it prohibits the distribution of flyers or handbills without the university鈥檚 prior approval, includes none of these 鈥渘arrow, objective, and definite standards,鈥 and is therefore unconstitutional.

NKU鈥檚 response to the Jacobsen affair clearly demonstrates that the university values free speech and takes its First Amendment obligations seriously. It is our hope, therefore, that NKU will stand behind its commitment to free speech by removing these noxious policies from its books.

Recent Articles

FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share