Ken WhiteA Banal First Amendment Fact Pattern At Wayne State
https://popehat.substack.com/p/wayne-state-professor-steven-shaviro
https://popehat.substack.com/p/wayne-state-professor-steven-shaviro
This splainer is fairly far along the "grumpy" axis
Also: when a professor gets suspended for saying something, and the university President says the statement is outside First Amendment protection, I think a reasonable and responsible journalist/publication would assess that claim and perhaps ask someone whether it's right and then print the answer.
BruceAlso (reading only this post), first amendment protections do not protect against non-governmental retribution. It would be employment laws and regulations that would cover the required reasons for dismissal.
@bruce_korb Incorrect. Government school. Employment consequences governed by First Amendment test -- just a slightly different test. See second update.
I'm sure you're correct, "but" I'd think that applying consequences to someone deliberately creating dissension and discord* wouldn't be first amendment relevant. He said what he said for shock value. I'll go back to my peanut gallery now. ;)
* (I meant to use the word, "disruption." School administrators cannot allow disruptive people to disrupt the campus.)
Lizard@bruce_korb @Popehat Any speech that goes against the mood of the moment can be claimed to be 'deliberately creating dissension and disruption'. This is as true of wearing a black armband to protest the Vietnam war as it is of saying wrongthinkers should be assassinated. How does one CHANGE the current "everyone agrees..." thinking without saying, "No, I disagree."? And how will that not, tautologically, be disruptive?
Karl Auerbach@Popehat @bruce_korb I agree that the University is constrained by 1st Amendment, but supposed that Prez Wilson had said "This prof's speech is protected, we disagree, but it's his right." And then goes on to add: "However, we feel that private individuals could and ought to take such 'remedial' action as they feel appropriate, perhaps even taking the professor's own arguments regarding the relative values of shouting down vs killing."
In other words can the university launder its desire to punish the professor by discussing, just short of clearly inciting, private actors to act on the university's behalf?
@karlauerbach @bruce_korb Getting closer to unprotected incitement: specific target, more likely.