College campuses have banned many offensive words and terms directed towards certain groups of people. This include racist slurs, sexist comments and speech that is demeaning or otherwise intended to offend or harm groups or individuals. Many favor these speech code enforcements in schools, while others believe it strongly violates the first amendment. Interpretation of this is left to court judges who have ruled in favor of the opposition, stating that public colleges are required to impose little in the way of speech conduct. The one exception to this is when speech has an immediate and dangerous consequence. Then it can be regulated. There are those in favor of speech codes which believe that they will aid in the general protection of young people on campuses and those who believe it goes directly against the second amendment. Both …show more content…
As long as no immediate threat is created, opposers believe that any speech suppression is unconstitutional. There is a distinction between people threatening to kill vs disrespecting a peer for a having different lifestyle or skin color. Conservatives and Libertarians believe that only regulating speech which imposes imminent threat should be lawful and all other forms of expression through speech are allowed. Oliver Wendell Holmes commented in opposition to the regulations stating, "The very aim and end of our institutions is just this: that we may think what we like and say what we think." The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the opposers and decided that all public colleges are not allowed to decide what students can and cannot say unless it is deemed an immediate threat. Students still have the choice to attend schools with strict speech codes if they wish through the private school
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Earlier this month in April, student protestors rioted at Berkley University because they did not want certain Conservative guest speakers to be able to give speeches at the university due to some of the speakers comments being inappropriate. According to the nonprofit organization committed to defending civil liberties named The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), "One worrisome trend undermining open discourse in the academy is the increased push by some students and faculty to 'disinvite' speakers with whom they disagree from campus appearances" (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). While the protesters were practicing their first amendment right to petition, the students were infringing upon the Conservative speakers freedom of speech which is unconstitutional. Just because the protesters may have disagreed with the speakers comments, does not mean that theys hould have prevented them from being able to express them. This is similar to the novel 1984 because the protestors controlled and censored what was able to be said at Berkeley University, just like how in the novel the Thought Police controlled what citizens said just because The Party disagreed with certain perspectives and didn’t want certain information to be
One reason why schools shouldn't limit students' online speech is that students have the freedom of speech which says that they can express themselves and have their own opinion.
This is a case of great importance because it addresses the issue of the broadness of the First Amendment as well as student’s freedom of speech rights being limited based on vicinity and because they are students. From this case it can be concluded that the courts were indecisive in their decision making process and that they will continue to interpret the First Amendment to their suiting and not as it is written. Finally, schools do need to have the right to enforce policies that are beneficial to the students.
Censorship in schools can protect children and eliminate problems, but it can also cause many other problems. For one thing, it sometimes violates the First Amendment. The First Amendment states that “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” (Taylor 15). These rights are guaranteed to all American citizens, and that includes schoolchildren as well. According to the Constitution, the government cannot take away these basic rights. Public schools are government funded, so they must be sure not to infringe on student’s rights or there could be a lawsuit on their hands. In addition to legal consequences, school is about learning and ...
Some of those waging a war on racism have established anti-discrimination policies, and have had these policies challenged as a result. Central Michigan University, for example, had instituted a discriminatory harassment policy, only to have it shot down by the Supreme Court in 1995 on grounds that the policy "necessarily requires [the] university to assess racial or ethnic content of speech." Since Central Michigan University is a State school, the First Amendment prohibits it from enacting regulations that would limit an individual's right to free speech unless the regulations, according to a 1986 ruling by the Supreme Court, are "narrowly and precisely designed."
... the established case law because of the schools ability to limit those freedoms. When looking at restricting or granting student or group speech administrators must be consistent, because allowing one student or group to expression their First Amendment right opens a door for other student or groups that can be difficult to close. The institution should have clear policies that designate Public Forums, Designated Public Forums, Limited Public Forums, and Non-public Forms. Furthermore, a policy should be created explaining a student’s rights with procedures for a student to redress grievances. Beyond the established policies, administers must be aware of (and have training in) student rights, but should also understand the breadth of power public institutions have to restrict those freedoms when the expression of those freedoms would cause disruption to the school.
At this point in a college freshmen’s life, they have been in school for 14 years. Throughout those 14 years, freshmen have learned the Bill of Rights like they’ve learned how to walk and the first amendment the way they’ve learned to talk. The first amendment has been engrained in a child from the first history class in 5th grade, to the fifth history class in 9th grade and the eighth class in their senior year. In those eight years, a student has the first amendment in their head to bring to college and express themselves how they see fit and how they have been socialized to do so. According to Dinesh D’Souza, Stuart Taylor and Tim Robbins freedom of speech has been inhibited and taken out by politics and political correctness and fueled heavily by the societies need for preferential treatment.
...that is accepted and listened to. Whether one’s audience is fellow classmates, the school body, or even the board of administrators themselves, every student in a higher institution deserves to be listened to without fear of punishment. Freedom of speech is the main foundational right that kept this country from falling into controlled government because it’s the right to have an opinion, even if it contradicts the “important” people. It is a basic right every citizen should have throughout their life as an American citizen, and more importantly, as a college student preparing for adulthood in a world where their opinions are crucial to society.
In most campuses, speech codes are enforced. Students can get into trouble for what they say, what they post on Facebook, and even what they wear. Schools like Colorado College won’t allow embarrassing statements to be said about other students. Certain jokes or “inappropriate e-mails” are banned, and at times, the area where students are allowed to express themselves amount to a miniscule free speech zone, such as in the University of Cincinnati. Davidson College even prohibits students from asking other students out on dates. (“What Every Student Should ...
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the exercise of an individual’s freedom of speech from infringement by government; the Fourteenth Amendment extends this protection to the States and local levels of government, including public schools and universities. The Supreme Court has held that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (Tinker). School officials have the authority to censor school-sponsored speech based on legitimate pedagogical concerns. The dean of students has not censored any editorials yet, but required that they be cleared by her before publication. The main issue in this case is whether there exists a legitimate reason on her part to require the clearance of every editorial. Additionally, the dean of students has warned against a planned rally to protest lavish spending. This protest is not school-sponsored speech, but student speech that occurs in school premises. In Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Sch. Dist., the Supreme Court ruled that speech must be tolerated unless it “substantially interfere[s] with the work of the school or impinge[s] upon the rights of other students.” Here the question is on the justification of the school to use disciplinary action against protesting students.
...eges were to abide by the first amendment of the Constitution, they would discover the different pitches and tones that accompany each voice. Instead, some colleges put a ban on what students say or wear. We are no longer in the age of McCarthyism where every aspect of society needs to be censored. Donna Shalala, owner of a Presidential Medal of Freedom, once said " You can't have a university without having free speech, even though at times it makes us terribly uncomfortable. If students are not going to hear controversial ideas on college campuses, they're not going to hear them in America. I believe it's part of their education". I agree with Ms. Shalala, America is a country built on strong principles like individualism. Free speech constitutes individualism. Free speech is a right; not a privilege and colleges have no right to restrict the power of thought.
We as students have many rights at school, a lot of these rights protect us from school rules and punishments. One of these rights is the first amendment right, which is freedom of speech. Freedom of speech includes the right not to speak or respond, maybe to a teacher or administrator, it also gives you the right to use offensive words and phrases if conveying a political message. This amendment also overlaps into dress code giving us the right to express ourselves, especially about a political opinion.
The First Amendment prohibits Congress from implementing laws which bar freedom of speech and press. This vital piece of the U.S. Constitution helped build one of the more forward thinking nations of today. America is a melting pot of eclectic cultures, but rights and privilege do not always equal respect. Every citizen is protected by constitutional law, but the Supreme Court must decipher free speech from hate speech as the latter is unlawful. The end goal of any regulation is to maintain order without sacrificing anyone’s personal dignity, but implementation requires action in addition to written word.
"Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to
One instance of free speech controversy was when a fraternity member of the University Of Maryland had an email leaked of which he said very derogatory and racist remarks about women and shaming them on their appearance. When this email was leaked it created a widespread of controversy and anger among the country. The difficult part in this was that by popular opinion many would want to expel the student who wrote that email but lawyers suggest that by doing so would violate the student 's constitutional rights to freedom of expression. The problem with labeling this kind of behavior as hate speech and trying to suppress vulgar language is no matter how vile the language is it is protected under the first amendment of the constitution. Universities have come together in trying to diffuse this kind of behavior by adding codes of conduct that prohibit certain forms of speech from being permitted on campus. These initiatives have been challenged by civil liberty groups who feel that by prohibiting certain forms of speech the universities are restricting students on their first amendment rights and has to be cautious on what they say as one minor joke could be taken the wrong