UCLA Law Professor Claims University Of Oklahoma Had No Constitutional Authority To Expel Racist Chanters
Eugene Volokh, who teaches free speech law at UCLA School of Law, says members of the SAE fraternity that took part in the chant heard round the world are protected by the First Amendment, and, as a result, shouldn’t have been expelled from the University of Oklahoma, at least not for the reason they were expelled. Volokh thinks expelling students on the basis of a racist chant sets a poor precedent, setting the university on a slippery slope, and explains why in two columns written for the Washington Post.
Consider the president’s statement to the students: “You will be expelled because of your leadership role in leading a racist and exclusionary chant which has created a hostile educational environment for others.” Similar things could be said about a vast range of other speech.
He goes on to give several examples.
Black students talking to each other about how all whites are racist, and white cops — and maybe other whites — should get shot? Again, that could be labeled racist and exclusionary speech that, when publicized, can create a hostile educational environment for whites.
And he goes on…
Likewise, students talking about how they think homosexuality is evil, and that homosexuals shouldn’t get equal treatment? Could be called bigotry based on sexual orientation and exclusionary statements that, when publicized, can create a hostile educational environment for gays. Students talking about how women are inferior to men, or men are inferior to women — same thing.
Volokh definitely brings up an interesting point, and although he does feel the speech was “repugnant,” as do all rational people, that doesn’t mean it isn’t protected by the constitution.
If the University of Oklahoma president’s position is accepted as legally sound, then there’d be no legal basis for protecting the other kinds of speech while expelling students for this sort of speech.
While everyone that took part in the extremely racist and hateful chant is certainly deserving of removal from the university, it seems the grounds on which they were removed could become a national talking point. .
[via Washington Post and Washington Post]
Image via OU.edu
Willing to bet that OU Greeks sign some paperwork that gives the university some broad and ambiguous authority to kick them off in situations like this, just as many other universities do.
11 years ago at 3:24 pmFuck you bolen white power till I die
11 years ago at 5:25 pmI am shocked a professor, from Soviet California no less, is citing the Constitution in defense of these students.
11 years ago at 6:20 pmThey did not. If they did not directly threaten to do bodily harm to a specific person, they cannot be punished by the college, which is state-supported.
11 years ago at 7:47 pm“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
11 years ago at 7:53 pmThese guys should not have been expelled. The only action that should have happened was being dropped from SAE. Yes they are racist but being racist is not a crime and this opens up the floodgates for mountains of grey area politically correct bullshit. What if 10 years from now people are being expelled for saying “there will never be a transgender DKE.” You simply can’t expel someone for not being a progressive liberal.
11 years ago at 8:17 pm[…] this article from TFM, it depicts a few quotes from Eugene Voholk, a UCLA law professor. Eugene states that the […]
11 years ago at 8:48 pmThe UCLA professor is most likely correct. Here’s how I see it, and for what it’s worth, I am an attorney: OU being a government actor absolutely cannot punish someone over free speech, a clear violation of the First Amendment. Sure, that doesn’t mean that all speech is protected, and I know they’re using the “hostile environment” argument. If the students sue, I don’t see that holding up because it is clear that the chant was utilized in a private setting, obviously sang in jest, not trying to intimidate anyone. On the other hand, I’m sure these kids’ reputations are ruined and would probably prefer going to a different school anyways.
11 years ago at 3:46 pmLawyer here also and he’s 100% right. Clear violation of the First Amendment. Plus, how is a bus carrying people to a party a “learning environment?”
For the record I abhor racism and homophobia, but we cannot allow creeping suppression of the right of free speech. The right is not absolute (no “FIRE” in a crowded theater) but this speech does not threaten anyone. Stupid and obnoxious and juvenile, yes. Dangerous, no.
11 years ago at 9:16 pmI smell a lawsuit.
11 years ago at 7:59 pm