Pulling federal funding to universities for speech it does not agree with would be unconstitutional because there is no compelling interest and it would be a very restrictive mean even if there was a compelling interest.
Any university or college who accepts government money is bound by the same rules the government is. It cannot decide what speech it does or does not like.
So then why can the same government, under Ben Carson, pull funding for speech it doesn't agree with?
Let's see how much 'constitutional law' you actually learned.
Where does the Constitution give the federal government the authority to use tax money to support universities and colleges?
Looks like you'll have to give back that 'A,' huh?
You so very smugly asked another,
"Where does the Constitution give the federal government the authority to use tax money to support universities and colleges?" [Emphasis Added]
To even those with an inadequate understanding of the Constitution, as yourself, one should be able to recall the enumerated powers of Congress and
instantly recall the "necessary and proper" clause of Article I, Section 1, Clause 18.
Perhaps you may have heard of one or two of the pieces of legislation passed by Congress and signed into law:
1. Morrill Land-Grant Act (1862), establishing Land-Grant Collages;
2. Hatch Act (1887)
3. Agricultural Collage Act (1890)
4. Smith-Lever Act (1914)
Now play nice, and go to the back of the class, dear! There's a good little girl!
