Oklahoma banned students could sue the college and win big

[NYcarbineer]

The students have a perfect case. They were off campus in a private venue. Punishing people for unpopular statements is exactly what the 1A was meant to prevent.

Yes, and OU even invaded that privacy. The school needs to be sued for infringement.

That's why i said "WIN BIG" in the thread title. They wont just win on the grounds of their free speech being violated and censored, but they were publicly slandered and made an example of for exercising their right to free speech, which could have LIFE long implications that affect every part of their life and even finances.


This take punitive damages to a whole new stratosphere.

The video is what exposed them. Who gets sued for slander for taking and/or showing the video?

 

[jillian]

The students have a perfect case. They were off campus in a private venue. Punishing people for unpopular statements is exactly what the 1A was meant to prevent.

Yes, and OU even invaded that privacy. The school needs to be sued for infringement.

That's why i said "WIN BIG" in the thread title. They wont just win on the grounds of their free speech being violated and censored, but they were publicly slandered and made an example of for exercising their right to free speech, which could have LIFE long implications that affect every part of their life and even finances.


This take punitive damages to a whole new stratosphere.

free speech is not limitless. (see real life caselaw) and schools always have certain limits.

again, where are you getting your pretend legal assessments?

 

[rightwinger]

They acted stupid, but what law were they in violation of?

Exactly.

Nobody arrested them

They didn't stomp on anybody's rights, so they broke no laws. They are innocent. What reason did the university have to expel them?

Violation of the schools code of conduct

Gee, weren't they off-campus and in a closed, private bus?
How far does a code-of-conduct reach?

It was an SAE event

SAE is a fraternal organization resident at OU and sanctioned by the parent organization and the university
What has been shown is that this racist chant was taught to new members and had been performed many times. As can be seen on the tape, this was a very popular song....lynching negroes and all

Both the SAE parent organization and university acknowleged this is not the type of organization they want on campus

 

[Freewill]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

My position is that the government and its agents cannot restrict or punish speech based solely on content. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the University would not have been.

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

They however cannot no matter what use what the student says as grounds to expel them. Period. Public universities are bound by the 1st amendment in the bill of rights in the Constitution.

Private universities aren't.

So, if this group were the Black Panthers Frat. and they were parading down the street chanting death to ****** you don't think that the school has a responsibility to do something? What if the black panthers were videoed singing that type of words on a bus? What then? Ignore the threat? People have the right to disagree, or should have the right to disagree, they don't have the right to make threats no matter how unlikely they are to act on those threats.

 

[pinqy]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

My position is that the government and its agents cannot restrict or punish speech based solely on content. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the University would not have been.

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

They however cannot no matter what use what the student says as grounds to expel them. Period. Public universities are bound by the 1st amendment in the bill of rights in the Constitution.

Private universities aren't.

So a student in a class who decides to call his black teacher/professor Mr. N***** at every opportunity CANNOT be disciplined in any way?

Of course he can...for his behavior in disrupting class.

 

[bodecea]

This thread is one more example of how the fascist left loses no opportunity to crush free speech under it's Nazi jackboots.

You'd have a point, if you actually knew what the Amendment on Free Speech actually meant. But you don't.

 

[Judicial review]

I think that the college has the right to refuse service to just about anyone they want. Of course, it is my opinion, that if this were a black frat. then the administration might not have done what they did but we have no way of knowing. Or if the college tried to expel or refuse admission to a black person, such as MalcomX because of his views there would be a gigantic firestorm of crap raining down.

Don't you people think it is way past time to stop with the racists BS? I sure do but we are inundated with race from the left every single day. Almost nothing can be said about a person without the left bring up race, if the person is not white. Call Obama a monkey, racism, call Bush a monkey, meaningful political banter, at least according to the left. Make a movie with a mostly black cast such as Selma and it sucks just cry racism because no one wants to hear about Selma, we are race fatigued.

I would like to see equal treatment under the law and this situation does point to the inequality of the enforcement of the laws. How can there be ANY group on ANY campus with the term "BLACK" in their title? Why isn't that racist or at the very least discriminatory? How can there be an exclusionary group in Congress named the Black caucus? How? The NAACP, advancement of colored people, to the demise of white people?

If we are going to be completely correct and this college is being correct, in my opinion, then let us rid our country of all bastions of racism. Now I am not for getting rid of all liberals, but that certainly would do the trick. But I am for fairness and enforcing laws across the board.

None of this matters. The racist remarks don't matter at all. Them threatening black students doesn't matter, because that is all allowed under the constitution under freedom of speech and no one can take that away from them. Period. The University did just that when it expelled them for the racist remarks even though they gave some other doctored up reason, which will not hold up in court and be a direct violation of their constitutional rights to free speech. Expelling them for this reason is what took it to far not abolishing the frat house, which was understandable. You have to separate the two. We are talking about something way more important and meaningful here.

Nope, free speech does not extend to threatening people, at least in my opinion. If the students sang a some about the NAACP being a racist organization then I would say, OK freedom of speech that is their opinion. But as soon as they start singing about lynching people they have crossed the line.

That said, the school, and anyone else, has the right to refuse service for their own reasons as long as it is keeping with civil rights acts. Refusing service because of differing thought or beliefs is not discriminatory. As long as that practice is applied equally.

Wrong. There are actual uS supreme court cases where the people threatening to harm were deemed to have their rights violated. This is an issue that will never get to the supreme court and will likely be settled by a federal judge who cites the supreme court case i referenced like they have to do when making a ruling that was already decided by the US supreme m court.

It's amazing how stupid the university is for doing this and how much shit they are now in.

 

[Judicial review]

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

My position is that the government and its agents cannot restrict or punish speech based solely on content. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the University would not have been.

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

They however cannot no matter what use what the student says as grounds to expel them. Period. Public universities are bound by the 1st amendment in the bill of rights in the Constitution.

Private universities aren't.

So a student in a class who decides to call his black teacher/professor Mr. N***** at every opportunity CANNOT be disciplined in any way?

Of course he can...for his behavior in disrupting class.

exactly. You cannot cite what a student says as grounds for expulsion. That is a direct violation of the 1st amendment of free speech, which "public" universities are bound to follow and allow. Period.

There's no sugar coating it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If there wasn't a code or rule being violated, then the college just censored free speech and on top of it slandered these students reputation by publicizing this situation in the way that they did, and potentially did financial harm to them.

It's a "public" university. Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say under article 1 of the constitution.

Could likely win an arguement that their civil rights were violated whether a school policy was broken or not.

What civil right was violated, because it wasn't free speech.

 

[Freewill]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

The issue is whether OU had the right to expell them. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the actions of OU are a totally different issue.

Is there anything any group could say that you would think that the school should act upon? What if this bus were returning from a KKK midnight cross burning, would the school be able to then act upon that situation? You and I both know there are limits to what a person can say, I don't need to bring up yelling fire in a movie theater.

Do you agree that a school, or anyone else, has the right to refuse services? Ever?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If there wasn't a code or rule being violated, then the college just censored free speech and on top of it slandered these students reputation by publicizing this situation in the way that they did, and potentially did financial harm to them.

It's a "public" university. Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say under article 1 of the constitution.

Could likely win an arguement that their civil rights were violated whether a school policy was broken or not.

What civil right was violated, because it wasn't free speech.

Was absolutely free speech. They were in a private vehicle, not out in public (though they woulda been protected then as well.)

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is an example of an item contained in a sample student enrollment contract:


3. I understand that the school may terminate my enrollment if I fail to comply with attendance, academic, and financial requirements or if I fail to abide by established standards of conduct, as outlined in the school catalog. While enrolled in the school, I understand that I must maintain satisfactory academic progress as described in the school catalog and that my financial obligation to the school must be paid in full before a certificate may be awarded.

...I'm guessing OU students sign on to similar compliance requirements when they choose to enroll at the school.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

Saying that free speech is a right granted to every citizen no mattter what they say is not the same as saying that you have the right to say anything you want any time under any circumstances.

Yes it is. 'no matter' makes it all encompassing.

 

[Judicial review]

The students have a perfect case. They were off campus in a private venue. Punishing people for unpopular statements is exactly what the 1A was meant to prevent.

Yes, and OU even invaded that privacy. The school needs to be sued for infringement.

That's why i said "WIN BIG" in the thread title. They wont just win on the grounds of their free speech being violated and censored, but they were publicly slandered and made an example of for exercising their right to free speech, which could have LIFE long implications that affect every part of their life and even finances.


This take punitive damages to a whole new stratosphere.

free speech is not limitless. (see real life caselaw) and schools always have certain limits.

again, where are you getting your pretend legal assessments?

That's not the point and what is violating the fist amendment. Free speech is a "right" and everybody has a "right" to say whatever they want to say, and to not allow that "right", by EXPELLING "ANY" student that says something that someone doesn't like or deems offensive is a direct violation of the First amendment of free speech.

Again it has NOTHING to do with what was said. It's that they said it, "according to the university."

 

[hangover]

Hate speech is like yelling "fire!" in a movie theater when there isn't one....It's illegal.
Do you think colleges should allow the KKK and neo-nazis to have fraternities?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

My position is that the government and its agents cannot restrict or punish speech based solely on content. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the University would not have been.

and thats the point, either we have free speech or we don't. If what you say offends someone, tough shit. Lots of stuff said by the left offends me, but I would fight for their right to say it.

who got kicked out of school for rioting in Ferguson and screaming "kill the cops" " kill ******" ? No one.

of course most of the rioters were not in any school to get kicked out of.

In my opinion it is the school's choice to refuse service. The students have the right to say what they want but there may be a price to pay for that right.

What I look for is equality in enforcement, which I do not see.

That's true. OU has the right to refuse. The students have the right to say what they want. We'll see what the university does when some rap surfaces referring to killing ******, smacking the *****, beating the pigs and so on.

 

[Judicial review]

If there wasn't a code or rule being violated, then the college just censored free speech and on top of it slandered these students reputation by publicizing this situation in the way that they did, and potentially did financial harm to them.

It's a "public" university. Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say under article 1 of the constitution.

Could likely win an arguement that their civil rights were violated whether a school policy was broken or not.

What civil right was violated, because it wasn't free speech.

You cannot expel or prevent the speach no matter what was said. By expelling these students they are saying you don't have a right to a voice. They are saying we the university can decide what you say and what you cannot, and if you don't abide by those rules we will expel you. That is pure censorship. A direct violation of the first amendment of the constitution of free speech.

Remember this is a PUBLIC university. A private university can.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

So, you're for limited speech?

 

[rightwinger]

The idea that when you're a student you have the right to say anything you want, any time, under any circumstances,

and be protected from any consequences is so absurd that it's hard to believe anyone could even think that.

I don't think anyone is entertaining that idea.

Maybe you should have bothered to read the OP:

"Free speech could have been violated a right granted to every citizen no matter what they say..."

The issue is whether OU had the right to expell them. SAE was perfectly justified in shutting down the chapter, but the actions of OU are a totally different issue.

The school quoted creating a "hostile environment"

Is threatening other students with lynching hostile?

 

[Judicial review]

Hate speech is like yelling "fire!" in a movie theater when there isn't one....It's illegal.
Do you think colleges should allow the KKK and neo-nazis to have fraternities?

This not about fraternities which they were within legal bounds to close down. Expelling them for having a voice no matter what was said is against federal law because it's against the constitution. Private universities can do this. Public ones are bound by the free speech laws of the Constitution.