Conservatives Win Free Speech Fight Against UMass-Amherst

Authored by Zachary Petrizzo via Campus Reform,

The University of Massachusetts-Amherst has agreed to lift restrictions on the location and duration of speech, ending a legal fight with conservative students. 

As previously reported by Campus Reform, Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) objected to a provision of the school’s land use policy, which stipulated that “outdoor speeches and rallies during class hours may be held only on the -west side (main entrance) of the Student Union Building, and shall be limited to one (1) hour in length, from noon to 1:00 P.M.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a legal group representing YAL in court, announced the policy change in a press release late last month, noting that the lawsuit has been dropped in light of the development.

“In response to a student group’s lawsuit, University of Massachusetts Amherst has eliminated its highly restrictive speech policy that limited all ‘speeches and rallies’ to less than one percent of campus and only between noon and 1 p.m. each day,” ADF wrote.

“In light of the changes made by the Board of Trustees as part of a preliminary settlement, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing the campus chapter of Young Americans for Liberty and student Nicholas Consolini voluntarily dismissed their lawsuit.”

Notably, university officials have previously defended the school’s controversial policy, arguing that the provision does not violate constitutional law.

“The University’s policies regarding such events are in accordance with the United States Supreme Court’s longstanding acceptance of content-neutral restrictions on the time, place, and manner of such speech,” UMass Amherst spokesman Ed Blaguszewski told The Daily Collegian in January.

“These policies provide a substantial opportunity for public speech while allowing the campus community to continue to conduct academic, business, and other activities.” Blaguszewski added, referencing the school’s policies.

“We are proud of our community’s tradition of activism and we support it.”

According to the Foundation of Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), UMass Amherst currently has a “yellow light” speech code rating,” meaning the school has “at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application.”

YAL President Cliff Maloney, Jr. praised the university for removing its controversial policy, stressing that “restricting free speech rights to one hour a day on less than 1 percent of the campus is unconstitutional, no questions asked.” 

“I applaud the UMass Board for their decision and hope this change will spark a wave of policy reform on college campuses across the country,” Maloney added, according to ADF.

ADF Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer also underscored that “today’s university students will be tomorrow’s voters and civic leaders,” which is “why it’s so vital that public colleges and universities exemplify the First Amendment values they are supposed to be teaching to students.”

Spokespersons for UMass Amherst did not respond to inquiries from Campus Reform regarding the lawsuit settlement and the school’s future actions. 

Comments

toady powow Tue, 07/10/2018 - 18:27 Permalink

Play stupid games, win shitty prizes.

Seriously, any "lawsuit" victories are hollow unless they lead to the death of the loser.

Fine a multi-trilliion dollar multinational a few hundred million?

Make some university change some arbitrary rule that they'll change on paper, but keep doing behind closed doors?

Yeah, the world is a wonderful place.

In reply to by powow

glenlloyd Bigly Tue, 07/10/2018 - 23:57 Permalink

Sounds like someone we used to call Mr. Chins

This issue isn't over, however, I'm encouraged by the new SCOTUS justice choice.

Now if only we could get rid of RBG and give Trump another selection that would be great. Didn't she promise to move to New Zealand if Trump was elected? I think it's time to put some pressure on her to walk the walk now that she's talked the talk.

In reply to by Bigly

Expendable Container toady Tue, 07/10/2018 - 18:55 Permalink

George Orwell (an ex-communist) DID try and warn us that communist tyranny was intended against us in all spheres and especially freedom to speak freely and even to think freely. Weaponised words are created to chain our minds through fear. Best antidote is to hell with them and always be politically incorrect. That is what I love about Zero Hedge commenters. They are already living that!

"SILENCE MEANS CONSENT"

Its okay to be White.

In reply to by toady

Ajax-1 toady Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:07 Permalink

Hit UMass where it hurts. Make them pay a fine and make it so that they are not eligible for any federal funds for at least 5 years.  Criminally charge the University President with Hate Crimes and Civil Rights Violations.

In reply to by toady

insanelysane Ajax-1 Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:59 Permalink

UMass is run by the Dem establishment in MA so any fine would just punish the taxpayer.  Here is a true story from this spring.

Small private college, Mt Ida, just west of Boston is in financial trouble.  Their board says debt is $50 to $65 million.

Small private college in same time, Lasell, says we can merge but we need to see your financials.

Mt. Ida board says no to seeing books but trust us on the $50 to $65 million.  Lasell tells Mt Ida to go fuck themselves.

In comes UMass as the Dems that run UMass are friends with the Mt Ida board.

UMass says they're in as $50 to $65 million is a "bargain."

Tally comes in at (I know you're shocked) $85 million.  UMass is all in.  Some Dems realize this deal is too shady for even the sheepiest socialist in Massachusetts.  They negotiate the deal to $75 million with an unnamed unsecured creditor eating a $10 million loss.

So nothing happens to the Mt Ida board that originally estimated their debt at $50 to $65 million even though it was $85 million.  They were either grossly incompetent or attempting to perpetrate a fraud.  But since they were nice Dems there will be no justice sought in Massachusetts.

The unsecured creditor should have lost all $20 million as everyone should have let this poorly run school go bankrupt.

It sounds cruel but when UMass "saved" the school, the students were shit out of luck.  Their only option was to go to one of UMass' shitiest schools, UMass Dartmouth.  The students would have been in the same boat if the school went bankrupt since they could have always gotten accepted to UMass Dartmouth.

So UMass and the Dem establishment spent $75 million of tax payer money to buy a school that would have fetched at most $50 million in bankruptcy and nothing was done for the students of Mt Ida but the Dems of Massachusetts will tell you how much they care for the poor children at the border.

In reply to by Ajax-1

BidnessMan insanelysane Tue, 07/10/2018 - 22:23 Permalink

Tip of of the iceberg.  Hundreds of small private mediocre colleges will go bankrupt in the next 10 years.  The days of Gender Studies degrees from no-name colleges staffed by politically correct "tenured" faculty will quickly die a deserved death once the Student Loan Ponzi Scheme collapses.  Good riddance.  Look forward to getting a coffee from a PhD barista.   

In reply to by insanelysane

insanelysane Ajax-1 Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:59 Permalink

UMass is run by the Dem establishment in MA so any fine would just punish the taxpayer.  Here is a true story from this spring.

Small private college, Mt Ida, just west of Boston is in financial trouble.  Their board says debt is $50 to $65 million.

Small private college in same time, Lasell, says we can merge but we need to see your financials.

Mt. Ida board says no to seeing books but trust us on the $50 to $65 million.  Lasell tells Mt Ida to go fuck themselves.

In comes UMass as the Dems that run UMass are friends with the Mt Ida board.

UMass says they're in as $50 to $65 million is a "bargain."

Tally comes in at (I know you're shocked) $85 million.  UMass is all in.  Some Dems realize this deal is too shady for even the sheepiest socialist in Massachusetts.  They negotiate the deal to $75 million with an unnamed unsecured creditor eating a $10 million loss.

So nothing happens to the Mt Ida board that originally estimated their debt at $50 to $65 million even though it was $85 million.  They were either grossly incompetent or attempting to perpetrate a fraud.  But since they were nice Dems there will be no justice sought in Massachusetts.

The unsecured creditor should have lost all $20 million as everyone should have let this poorly run school go bankrupt.

It sounds cruel but when UMass "saved" the school, the students were shit out of luck.  Their only option was to go to one of UMass' shitiest schools, UMass Dartmouth.  The students would have been in the same boat if the school went bankrupt since they could have always gotten accepted to UMass Dartmouth.

So UMass and the Dem establishment spent $75 million of tax payer money to buy a school that would have fetched at most $50 million in bankruptcy and nothing was done for the students of Mt Ida but the Dems of Massachusetts will tell you how much they care for the poor children at the border.

In reply to by Ajax-1

insanelysane Ajax-1 Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:59 Permalink

UMass is run by the Dem establishment in MA so any fine would just punish the taxpayer.  Here is a true story from this spring.

Small private college, Mt Ida, just west of Boston is in financial trouble.  Their board says debt is $50 to $65 million.

Small private college in same time, Lasell, says we can merge but we need to see your financials.

Mt. Ida board says no to seeing books but trust us on the $50 to $65 million.  Lasell tells Mt Ida to go fuck themselves.

In comes UMass as the Dems that run UMass are friends with the Mt Ida board.

UMass says they're in as $50 to $65 million is a "bargain."

Tally comes in at (I know you're shocked) $85 million.  UMass is all in.  Some Dems realize this deal is too shady for even the sheepiest socialist in Massachusetts.  They negotiate the deal to $75 million with an unnamed unsecured creditor eating a $10 million loss.

So nothing happens to the Mt Ida board that originally estimated their debt at $50 to $65 million even though it was $85 million.  They were either grossly incompetent or attempting to perpetrate a fraud.  But since they were nice Dems there will be no justice sought in Massachusetts.

The unsecured creditor should have lost all $20 million as everyone should have let this poorly run school go bankrupt.

It sounds cruel but when UMass "saved" the school, the students were shit out of luck.  Their only option was to go to one of UMass' shitiest schools, UMass Dartmouth.  The students would have been in the same boat if the school went bankrupt since they could have always gotten accepted to UMass Dartmouth.

So UMass and the Dem establishment spent $75 million of tax payer money to buy a school that would have fetched at most $50 million in bankruptcy and nothing was done for the students of Mt Ida but the Dems of Massachusetts will tell you how much they care for the poor children at the border.

In reply to by Ajax-1

hongdo toady Tue, 07/10/2018 - 20:22 Permalink

"Seriously, any "lawsuit" victories are hollow unless they lead to the death of the loser and his lawyer."

FIFY

"Law must retain useful ways to break with traditional forms because nothing is more certain than that the forms of Law remain when all justice is gone."

Gowachin Law from Frank Hebert's The Dosadi Experiment

In reply to by toady

Skip powow Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:24 Permalink

The Jewish leaders of the "FREE SPEECH MOVEMENT" which started at Berkeley University in the 1960s was run by Professor Herbert Aptheker and his daughter Bettina, she is a professor at University at Santa Cruz and NOW she says NO FREE SPEECH FOR NAZIS, seriously she has taken the opposite, but not really, position of what she and her Jewish father worked for then.
NOW that they have nearly TOTAL POWER, they SHUT YOU DOWN.

UN Passes Resolution Declaring Free Expression on the Internet a Human Right

Andrew Anglin writes :

But the honorable Mr. Hughes is correct in stating that these abuses of the right to free expression are happening in all parts of the world.

Virtually every EU member state is violating this ideology by banning criticism of Jews and other minorities on the internet, while also outlawing “denial” of the alleged Holocaust of the Jews.

Much more shocking, however, is that the United States, over the last year, has proven itself to be no better than China or the EU with regards to defending internet freedom.

I just want to make something perfectly clear: my personal rights to freedom of expression and legitimate dissent have been viciously abused by the United States government.

My website, Dailystormer.com, was taken down from the internet by GoDaddy, and then stolen from me by Google. The backbone infrastructure service, Cloudflare, refused to serve my content. Tucows, a major backbone service, denied me service.

As I documented fully at the time, all of these major companies serve Islamic terrorist and pro-pedophilia content.

Following this, I was subjected to an organized campaign of disenfranchisement by virtually every single company capable of providing me with service. I have been denied service by more companies than I can even count. This has been ongoing for nearly a year.

I have done nothing illegal. I have not been accused of, let alone charged with, a single crime.

And yet the US government has allowed for an organized conspiracy of completely unregulated oligopolistic corporations to deny me access to the internet.

This is absolutely no different than if I was told I had a right to eat food, but every single grocery store and restaurant organized together to deny me service, and so I was left to starve in the street while the government watched.

If private companies are allowed to organize to deny freedom of speech to an individual, while the government refuses to intervene, this is absolutely no different than a government ordering content removed from the internet.

In reply to by powow

WaterWings nmewn Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:11 Permalink

Keep it going. Encourage others to speak out in defense of a “human” family, aka a safe harbor for new humans to grow and explore for themselves rather than this Collectivist Evil. The Collectivists preach individualism but practice enslavement.

Look at this evil: https://youtu.be/5w955V6ULd4

Horrific that this is “entertainment” and “informative”. It makes me want to scream: “Can’t you see this as propaganda and programming!”

In reply to by nmewn

WaterWings nmewn Tue, 07/10/2018 - 19:46 Permalink

I use your handle at karaoke bars, FYI. 

Edit: always reading comments; top 20% Individualists find themselves here. Canz have “Individualist Party”? Ask a collectivist (I forget to deny them the honor of capital letters at times) if they prefer collectivism or Individualism

In reply to by nmewn

nmewn WaterWings Tue, 07/10/2018 - 20:33 Permalink

Sorry, late, Squire & I (he's nineteen now) were running a box of shells through my new shotgun.

Yes, the TOP individualists always find themselves here at ZH, all stripes, all cultures, races, nationalities..."collectivists" who are among those, use terms like "is'm's are bad! Don't use ism's! Evah! Its a trap!!!" unless of course it's human-ism, rac-ism, crony-ism etc.

It's actually kinda fun to watch em flop around.

/////

Edit: And I do appreciate the nmewn usage, by anyone so inclined, it throws "certain people" off the track of everyone else. Just imagine, millions of nmewn's...everywhere...at once...what could they do to any of us? ;-)

In reply to by WaterWings