KState Players Threaten Boycott

Quoner · June 30, 2020

2 hours ago, MeanGreenTeeth said:

Again.. principles matter. I don't care if he's the grand dragon of the White People and Mayonnaise Superiority glee club, his 1st amendment rights apply at a government institution. That doesn't mean he can scream "White Power" in the middle of a lecture, but it does mean he can say anything ideological on the public square.

Regardless of that.. I'm just saying that people need to understand that there are jackasses in life that you have to deal with as an adult. One twit out of 20k students doesn't make the institution bad and it isn't an excuse to not carry through with your commitments. It's not a rational nor mature response. Having integrity means doing the right thing even if others don't.

Would you quit your job if your boss was an outspoken racist? Would you chastize someone else if they did? This is such a weird hill to die on, Racism Voltaire.

MeanGreenTexan · June 30, 2020

54 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

again...that's not what the first amendment says.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances

at no point does the first amendment state or even imply that one can say anything they want with complete impunity and no fear of personal, professional or possibly bodily repercussions. he simply can't be jailed for vocalizing opinion/dissent/vulgarity.

to your example...he can say anything ideological on the public square and he can actually scream "White Power" in a lecture and not be arrested/imprisoned...but he can lose privilege, his job and his place at a pubic or private institution.

being kicked out of a public university is not tantamount to being arrested/imprisoned by the state.

furthermore...the university is not compelled by the boycott to act. it can chose America First Students of Manhattan over the K. State football team. there are repercussions to both decisions, though.

Correct the 1st amendment doesn’t say that explicitly, but it’s basically been built that way via precedents set by the Supreme Court over the many years of cases argued on it.

And in this instance, we’re talking about a tone deaf, callous, awful tweet that says nothing threatening. It would obviously be different if dude tweeted that he wanted to harm black students on campus in some way. That type of language is not protected (again, via precedent).

I suppose there’s no precedent around social media posts, but I would akin the world of Twitter to a whole bunch of people standing on corners speaking their minds. Their speech is protected until they cross specific lines the Supreme Court has created over the years. Of course, as you’re saying, their speech is not protected from heckling, or arguing, or being ignored, or being judged by the court of public opinion... of which dude is very guilty.

KSU may kick dude out for this, but before they do, they’d better have their ducks in a row because they will most certainly be sued.

Quoner · June 30, 2020

42 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Correct the 1st amendment doesn’t say that explicitly, but it’s basically been built that way via precedents set by the Supreme Court over the many years of cases argued on it.

And in this instance, we’re talking about a tone deaf, callous, awful tweet that says nothing threatening. It would obviously be different if dude tweeted that he wanted to harm black students on campus in some way. That type of language is not protected (again, via precedent).

I suppose there’s no precedent around social media posts, but I would akin the world of Twitter to a whole bunch of people standing on corners speaking their minds. Their speech is protected until they cross specific lines the Supreme Court has created over the years. Of course, as you’re saying, their speech is not protected from heckling, or arguing, or being ignored, or being judged by the court of public opinion... of which dude is very guilty.

KSU may kick dude out for this, but before they do, they’d better have their ducks in a row because they will most certainly be sued.

Reading comprehension check: they're asking for a policy to stop him in the future and the university president is fast tracking it. System worked?

MeanGreenTeeth · June 30, 2020

3 hours ago, Censored by Laurie said:

again...that's not what the first amendment says.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances

at no point does the first amendment state or even imply that one can say anything they want with complete impunity and no fear of personal, professional or possibly bodily repercussions. he simply can't be jailed for vocalizing opinion/dissent/vulgarity.

to your example...he can say anything ideological on the public square and he can actually scream "White Power" in a lecture and not be arrested/imprisoned...but he can lose privilege, his job and his place at a pubic or private institution.

being kicked out of a public university is not tantamount to being arrested/imprisoned by the state.

furthermore...the university is not compelled by the boycott to act. it can chose America First Students of Manhattan over the K. State football team. there are repercussions to both decisions, though.

Your argument is complete nonsense. The 1st amendment does not simply mean the government cannot imprison/arrest you for speaking and there isn't a constitutional scholar in the world who would agree with you. The government can't infringe on your free speech..period... which means that a government institution can't kick you out or punish you in any way for exercising it. There are of course a handful of exceptions to free speech, but none of them are satisfied here. Here is one of the most famous cases related to this... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doe_v._University_of_Michigan

MeanGreenTexan · June 30, 2020

7 hours ago, Quoner said:

Reading comprehension check: they're asking for a policy to stop him in the future and the university president is fast tracking it. System worked?

https://www.wibw.com/2020/06/29/k-state-president-plans-to-combat-racism/

Awesome! I figured KSU would do something. And that’s great. The tweets/threats from the players definitely had something to do with it as well, so yes, it absolutely worked. KSU will just need to make sure their new policy is one that’s enforceable. They have legal on retainer, I’m sure, so I bet they’ll be fine.

To be clear: I’m not advocating status-quo, or people need to develop ‘thicker skin’, or anything like that. I’m saying that in the I-want-it-now society we live in, policy addendums like this (however overdue they may be) should take time to be done right, & not implemented in reactionary haste, or you potentially open up a different can of worms.

MCMLXXX · June 30, 2020

7 hours ago, MeanGreenTeeth said:

Your argument is complete nonsense. The 1st amendment does not simply mean the government cannot imprison/arrest you for speaking and there isn't a constitutional scholar in the world who would agree with you. The government can't infringe on your free speech..period... which means that a government institution can't kick you out or punish you in any way for exercising it. There are of course a handful of exceptions to free speech, but none of them are satisfied here. Here is one of the most famous cases related to this... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doe_v._University_of_Michigan

Here is a link to the case. It is worth the time to read it. If you don't have the time just read the conclusion.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/721/852/1419700/

Edited June 30, 2020 by MCMLXXX

LongJim · June 30, 2020

Just now, MeanGreenTexan said:

https://www.wibw.com/2020/06/29/k-state-president-plans-to-combat-racism/

Awesome! I figured KSU would do something. And that’s great.

Doesn't look like much of anything at this point, actually.

Whatever language they use in whatever they come up with better be ironclad, because these types of "solutions" can turn out to be double-edged swords.

MeanGreenTexan · June 30, 2020

16 minutes ago, LongJim said:

Doesn't look like much of anything at this point, actually.

Whatever language they use in whatever they come up with better be ironclad, because these types of "solutions" can turn out to be double-edged swords.

Well, the President gave his word. It would be very tough to walk that back now.

What they come up with remains to be seen.

LongJim · June 30, 2020

14 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Well, the President gave his word. It would be very tough to walk that back now.

What they come up with remains to be seen.

Yep.

Quoner · June 30, 2020

43 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Well, the President gave his word. It would be very tough to walk that back now.

What they come up with remains to be seen.

I think a point everyone missed is no one asked for the student to be expelled. That's the obvious legal precedent this couldn't jump. Since the Michigan case and others, a lot of campus leaders have basically shrugged at incidents and speech like this and said "nothing we can do here." It was a scared copout that to be fair, is not unfounded (but you generally have paid legal counsel and firms on retainer/speed dial for a reason.)

Enter the policies I mentioned. You can't ban someone for saying a bad thing at a public school, but you can shore up the consequences around it. If they cross into targeted harassment or inciting violence, the law protects the removal. There is also, as the article says, endless opportunity to amplify other voices and drown out the idiots.

When you put the parameters and accountability in place, the idiots generally cry victim repeatedly, then screw up against the new rules. That's why it took 3 different incidents to get @eulesseagle banned. The dude just couldn't stop linking to white supremacist websites. The fun part is he wasn't even the only one who did it (shout out to those of you still here), but at least everyone else figured out how to stop. The KSU student has two years to avoid the ban or pull a @eulesseagle, so we'll see how it turns out all around.

Edited June 30, 2020 by Quoner

MeanGreenTexan · June 30, 2020

4 minutes ago, Quoner said:

I think a point everyone missed is no one asked for the student to be expelled. That's the obvious legal precedent this couldn't jump. Since the Michigan case and others, a lot of campus leaders have basically shrugged at incidents and speech like this and said "nothing we can do here." It was a scared copout that to be fair, is not unfounded (but you generally have paid legal counsel and firms on retainer/speed dial for a reason.)

Enter the policies I mentioned. You can't ban someone for saying a bad thing at a public school, but you can shore up the consequences around it. If they cross into targeted harassment or inciting violence, the law protects the removal. There is also, as the article says, endless opportunity to amplify other voices and drown out the idiots.

When you out the parameters and accountability in place, the idiots generally cry victim repeatedly, then screw up against the new rules. That's why it took 3 different incidents to get @eulesseagle banned. The dude just couldn't stop linking to white supremacist websites. The fun part is he wasn't even the only one who did it (shout out to those of you still here), but at least everyone else figured out how to stop. The KSU student has two years to avoid the ban or pull a @eulesseagle, so we'll see how it turns out all around.

He's also going to have to re-register his little organization this Fall, and I'm pretty sure the KSU Student Activities office will find some reason to reject it (at least, I hope they do). Plus, way more people on campus will know who he is and likely make his life miserable. I bet he transfers out before he has a chance to blow it. Or, he may just go balls to the wall and "martyr" himself.

97and03 · June 30, 2020

I don’t know about when you attended, but during my ridiculously long tenure at UNT one had to obtain the permission of the Dean of Students (or a similar office) to speak out on campus or protest. And it had to be not only approved but scheduled. Oh and it was only within about a 50x50 area in front of the Union with a plaque that said “Free Speech Area” - although I think the plaque neglected to include the asterisk saying “as long as pre-approved and scheduled.” I don’t know about your definition but it fails to meet the bar of free speech to me.
My point being that universities do not allow unfettered free speech, expression, or assembly and students agree to that upon enrolling whether they read the fine print or not.

El Paso Eagle · June 30, 2020

16 hours ago, Censored by Laurie said:

again...that's not what the first amendment says.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances

at no point does the first amendment state or even imply that one can say anything they want with complete impunity and no fear of personal, professional or possibly bodily repercussions. he simply can't be jailed for vocalizing opinion/dissent/vulgarity.

to your example...he can say anything ideological on the public square and he can actually scream "White Power" in a lecture and not be arrested/imprisoned...but he can lose privilege, his job and his place at a pubic or private institution.

being kicked out of a public university is not tantamount to being arrested/imprisoned by the state.

furthermore...the university is not compelled by the boycott to act. it can chose America First Students of Manhattan over the K. State football team. there are repercussions to both decisions, though.

Here is some interesting information with respect to "hate speech"

https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/does-the-first-amendment-protect-hate-speech.html

Speech Codes at Schools and Colleges

Courts have regularly struck down speech codes at public colleges and universities that barred racist or discriminatory comments. Usually, the courts found that the policies were too broad (meaning that they restricted too much expression that should be protected) or vague (meaning that students couldn’t predict what kinds of statements would be covered).

The rules are somewhat different for K-12 public schools. Courts have allowed more limits on students' freedom of expression than on college students or adults in other settings, as part of balancing students’ rights with schools’ responsibility to ensure that children have a safe learning environment.

Edited June 30, 2020 by El Paso Eagle

Quoner · June 30, 2020

30 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

Here is some interesting information with respect to "hate speech"

https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/does-the-first-amendment-protect-hate-speech.html

Speech Codes at Schools and Colleges

Courts have regularly struck down speech codes at public colleges and universities that barred racist or discriminatory comments. Usually, the courts found that the policies were too broad (meaning that they restricted too much expression that should be protected) or vague (meaning that students couldn’t predict what kinds of statements would be covered).

The rules are somewhat different for K-12 public schools. Courts have allowed more limits on students' freedom of expression than on college students or adults in other settings, as part of balancing students’ rights with schools’ responsibility to ensure that children have a safe learning environment.

And here's a recent Higher Ed article on how to respond to these incidents for the good of the community without running to expulsion and focusing on restorative justice, which is where KSU seems to be headed: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/06/23/first-amendment-response-first-response-racism-campus

Again, weird to see folks arguing that the students just need to lay back and take this to preserve the integrity of the first amendment. Most college speech codes at public schools read fairly consistently because legal teams have found what is possible and what can be enforced. And students who disagree have the same free speech rights to shout these assholes out using everything they got. Remember when the Aggies drowned out the Richard Spencer clown show? Ain't America grand?

MeanGreenTeeth · July 1, 2020

On 6/29/2020 at 8:56 PM, Quoner said:

Would you quit your job if your boss was an outspoken racist? Would you chastize someone else if they did? This is such a weird hill to die on, Racism Voltaire.

I don't accept this as a very apt comparison, but I think 1) engaging in a dialogue with the person would be the first, best solution (we've all had bosses/co-workers who've had various issues); and 2) if that didn't work, I would give appropriate notice and do my work until that time. I wouldn't light my paperwork on fire or anything similar in protest.

Edited July 1, 2020 by MeanGreenTeeth