Free Speech Issue....?

The following was written during school elections for my graduate school. The school (public) revoked his candidacy despite allowing other students to give their messages. The minority groups were outraged that he was not further punished. 1) Do you think he should have been punished? 2) do you think his candidacy should have been revoekd. 3) are the minority groups overreacting?

"I can't be burdened with your petty concerns and ideas. My first act will be to abolish diversity week and insure that those who instituted it are pelted with rocks and garbage. My second act will be to take any funds made available to me as your representative and spend them on tight-fitting pants and all sorts of lotions. There will be a suggestion box for your proposals and complaints. Those suggestions that are not immediately thrown away will be used for my entertainment, probably while taking lines off the tanned, taut stomachs of teenage boys of various exotic ethnicities."

Fantastic answer eastchic2001. This statement was written on an 8/11 piece of paper on a wall designated for application statements.

Here's the counterargument. Court cases regarding limiting speech in schools (Tinker v. des moines, fraser v. bethel etc) have always been restricted towards children in grade school (not college), and although the school generally has discretion to what is put on the walls, it cannot pick and choose what it wants on the wall once it opens up the forum (basically, it can restrict all postings, but cannot choose, unless the speech is obscene or threatening). Please address this...

Although on the face there seems to be a free speech (1st amendment) issue it relates more the the policies and rules of the educational institution. Although citizens have the right to freedom of speech, schools are allowed to exert some control about what is said, spoken, worn, etc. at school for policy reasons. It would be permissible for me to be fired for wearing a shirt to work that said "F*** You Everybody"! There are policy reasons for controlling what is said and done in certain environments ans school is one of the most important places.

Secondly, I think that the minorities maybe did overreact, because although what he said may have been rude, the school is not responsible for trying to control the thoughts and words of adults. They should attempt to keep unnecessary rudeness or racism or whatnot out of the school's student government, but punishment is not their job.

Finally, I think its fair to revoke his candidacy. Although he is free to say what he wishes in his own time, school's have a great interest in ensuring that student government is a respectable institution. They have a righteous interest in ensuring that persons involved with and representing this mini-gov't are not behaving or speaking in certain ways. They have guidelines, as they should, and public policy dictates that they should be allowed to create and enforce guidlines which are reasonably related to their interests.

EDIT: Good point about court cases addressing speech in grade schools rather than in upper-level education. I would simply argue, if representing the school, that simply public policy dictates that when a student chooses to attend a school it is permissible to require that student to agree to a code of conduct. I know that when I was accepted to law school I had to sign an honor code and school rules/regulations form. These two documents set forth guidelines for what was allowed at the school (this incidence would not have been allowed).

In this situation, the student may have implicitly agreed to the rules, regulations, and guidelines of attending the school and is thus bound by them. Thus, the school is in a position to enforce the rules and act in a way that prevents a breach. It would be interesting to see a court case about this revocation, because there is no telling what would happen. But, as I said, when he paid to tuition and enrolled in classes, he either expressly or impliedly agreed to a set of conduct (which probably prohibits this behavior) and thus the school is perfectly right in revoking his candidacy. Further, membership in a higher-education student government is a privilege, not a protected right.

TO Lin: I wasn't suggesting that the guy lie about how he feels and just sugarcoat his campaign. I was just saying that the school isn't responsible for enforcing what he does and says everyday, nor is the school responsible for censoring the actions or thoughts of every student. Merely, that the school has an interest in filtering the membership of student government. So, if the guy is just an average college student and not part of the gov't then he can say what he wishes and think what he wants. However, if he wishes to be part of the government he shouldn't be allowed to say such things.

There is no such thing as free speech in "School"! Your in school, not some political forum.

1). Not sure
2). Yes
3). Maybe, but why do you care so much about "his" candidacy?

You must remember that schools have rules, just like the rest of society. There are limits.

Not sure what the rules are in a graduate school about freedom of speech. If he wanted to he could probably fight it.

I thought it was rather hilarious and he should have stayed on the ticket. If they didn't want to vote for him, then they didn't have to. He'd merely be without votes.....kind of like Ross Perot, which incidentally, we need him now. The speech was great!!!!

Unlike most political a$$ kissers who have 6 different speeches, depending on the group they're speaking too, I (funningly) admire your friend, haha.

Can't ever accuse him of lieing.

If you're looking for free speech on America's college and university campuses, well, you're looking in the wrong places. If he'd have posted Marx & Engels' Communist Manifesto he might have been elected.