Author Topic: Opening Arguments #TTTBE  (Read 26967 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline xenu

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
  • Chicago Blackhawks 2010,13,15 Stanley Cup Champion
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #330 on: March 08, 2019, 07:25:17 PM »
Ya I'm not sure where to go on this one. I would think that it is a freedom of speech issue but then there is an issue on protecting the populace that I am not sure what has more pull.
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
Douglas Adams

Offline The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7269
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #331 on: March 08, 2019, 08:25:23 PM »
Ya I'm not sure where to go on this one. I would think that it is a freedom of speech issue but then there is an issue on protecting the populace that I am not sure what has more pull.

You really think it can be constitutional for a state actor to impose restrictions on speech in order to preserve morale? I'm flabbergasted.
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10658
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #332 on: March 08, 2019, 08:57:21 PM »
Ya I'm not sure where to go on this one. I would think that it is a freedom of speech issue but then there is an issue on protecting the populace that I am not sure what has more pull.

You really think it can be constitutional for a state actor to impose restrictions on speech in order to preserve morale? I'm flabbergasted.

C.  And, yes there are instances where it is not just constitutional, but just and appropriate for a state official to limit speech in particular settings.

and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7269
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #333 on: March 08, 2019, 09:26:18 PM »
In furtherance if a compelling governmental interest. That’s the standard. This is absolutely crazy.

And I would point out that this is not restrictions on time, place and manner; they are completely banning the holding of any event which debates affirmative action.

This is just bizarre.
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10658
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #334 on: March 08, 2019, 09:59:12 PM »
In furtherance if a compelling governmental interest. That’s the standard. This is absolutely crazy.

And I would point out that this is not restrictions on time, place and manner; they are completely banning the holding of any event which debates affirmative action.

This is just bizarre.

I think that's the standard for free speech in the wild. In a school setting it's different. The school is there for a purpose and everything they do at the school is for that purpose, including use of facilities for meetings, etc. And it would be up to school officials to decide if the proposed event was consistent with the school's purpose.

Suppose that rather than debating affirmative action, they wanted to host a white supremacist neo-nazi speaker? Would that be different in your estimation?
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline Swagomatic

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2677
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #335 on: March 08, 2019, 10:55:22 PM »
As for the newest one, the standard in free speech cases is compelling state interest and preserving morale doesn’t cut it.  A.

Yeah I think it's A also.
Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.
---George Bernard Shaw

Offline The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7269
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #336 on: March 09, 2019, 07:58:18 AM »
In furtherance if a compelling governmental interest. That’s the standard. This is absolutely crazy.

And I would point out that this is not restrictions on time, place and manner; they are completely banning the holding of any event which debates affirmative action.

This is just bizarre.

I think that's the standard for free speech in the wild. In a school setting it's different. The school is there for a purpose and everything they do at the school is for that purpose, including use of facilities for meetings, etc. And it would be up to school officials to decide if the proposed event was consistent with the school's purpose.

Suppose that rather than debating affirmative action, they wanted to host a white supremacist neo-nazi speaker? Would that be different in your estimation?

No.  If they provide facilities for student groups to host speakers, they must do so on a viewpoint-neutral basis. They can place time, place, and manner restrictions on the speech provided that they are narrowly-tailored, content-neutral, serve a compelling government interest, and allow ample alternative venues. It's the strict scrutiny test.

ETA: It should be noted that because it is a limited public forum, the school can restrict the use of the facility to certain groups (in this case, students).  But that does not mean it can place restrictions on the content of their speech.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2019, 08:01:30 AM by The Latinist »
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10658
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #337 on: March 09, 2019, 03:36:36 PM »
Again, suppose it was bro Nazis. Or the tiki torch guys. Or the Klan. And the were students.

Would the school have to allow them to use their facility for their meeting?

I think we’ll find out that if the school administration found those to be in compatible with their mission they would be allowed to ban them. Same with this debate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7269
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #338 on: March 09, 2019, 05:11:57 PM »
It doesn't matter how abhorrent their views, the government cannot create a limited public forum and then exclude on that basis.  They can impose time, place, and manner restrictions; they can provide an alternative venue if they have, for instance, security concerns; they can even require (in a viewpoint-neutral way) the organizers of the event to bear the cost of added security, etc. But they can't prohibit the event because they don't like what's going to be talked about.
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Offline xenu

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
  • Chicago Blackhawks 2010,13,15 Stanley Cup Champion
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #339 on: March 09, 2019, 06:05:46 PM »
Ya I'm not sure where to go on this one. I would think that it is a freedom of speech issue but then there is an issue on protecting the populace that I am not sure what has more pull.

You really think it can be constitutional for a state actor to impose restrictions on speech in order to preserve morale? I'm flabbergasted.

I was thinking along the lines of yelling fire in a movie theater. I thought the courts ruled on something like this. Also not so much morale but more along the lines of safty. I know it's a slippery slope for the state to say what can constitute public safty and is ripe for abuse. This would be for the courts to act as referee on each situation.
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
Douglas Adams

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10658
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #340 on: March 09, 2019, 07:18:46 PM »
It doesn't matter how abhorrent their views, the government cannot create a limited public forum and then exclude on that basis.  They can impose time, place, and manner restrictions; they can provide an alternative venue if they have, for instance, security concerns; they can even require (in a viewpoint-neutral way) the organizers of the event to bear the cost of added security, etc. But they can't prohibit the event because they don't like what's going to be talked about.

Well, there's a difference between a public facility, like a park or a community center or a city street, and a school that has a mission and a purpose and is set up to perform a specific function.

The courts have given wide latitude to schools, even public schools, at limiting various rights of students in order to perform their mission.

It will be interesting to see what the answer is.

(Keep in mind this will tell us only what the actually is, not what it should be)
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline xenu

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
  • Chicago Blackhawks 2010,13,15 Stanley Cup Champion
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #341 on: March 11, 2019, 06:28:03 PM »
Answer to #117

(click to show/hide)
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
Douglas Adams

Offline CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10658
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #342 on: March 11, 2019, 08:16:09 PM »
Answer to #117

(click to show/hide)

Well done, guys!
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7269
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #343 on: March 11, 2019, 10:31:53 PM »
It’s basic First Amendment jurisprudence.
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Offline xenu

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3896
  • Chicago Blackhawks 2010,13,15 Stanley Cup Champion
Re: Opening Arguments #TTTBE
« Reply #344 on: March 17, 2019, 09:40:58 AM »
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
Douglas Adams

 

personate-rain