Student Sues College After Campus Cops Demand He Get A Free Speech 'Permit' Before Handing Out Fliers
from the stinking-badges dept
Hey, budding adults! Welcome to college! Now, kindly shut up for the next few years.
Cal Poly Pomona’s campus policies impose a web of restrictions before students can distribute literature on campus: They must check in with the Office of Student Life, allow the school to copy their IDs, and wear badges signed by an administrator. Even then, would-be speakers are relegated to the so-called “free speech zone.” Badges can only be issued from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays, although the Office of Student Life pledges to “work with” any student who wishes to engage in expressive activity on evenings or weekends. Additionally, students must register in advance for outdoor events, and the Office of Student Life must approve all flyers and posters.That's what the First Amendment has been reduced to at Cal Poly Pomona: asking permission, wearing "free speech" badges and a standing-room-only patch of ground. These restrictions have prompted a lawsuit from student Nicolas Tomas, who alleges campus police prevented him from handing out pro-vegan fliers on a campus sidewalk and directed him to jump through the college's many speech-curbing hoops before exercising his First Amendment rights.
Despite being a public college -- which should encourage it to keep its free speech meddling to a minimum -- Cal Poly Pomona continues to issue policy-related "Presidential Orders" that strip away students' First Amendment rights. Because some of these orders haven't been made public, they're open to abuse, as Tomas points out in his lawsuit.
Together, the policies establish an unconstitutional “free speech zone” and impose unconstitutional prior restraints on expressive activities that limit free expression at Cal Poly Pomona.At some point between March 5th and today's date, CPP personnel updated the site to include the missing 2014 Presidential Order. No new link is provided, nor has the title of the existing link ["New Presidential Order: Use of University Buildings, Facilities, or Grounds (PDF)"] been altered. Only the destination document has. Instead, whoever was in charge of this simply swapped out the 2008 Order for the 2014 Order without any indication this change had taken place. Crafty.
The policies are contradictory, confusing, and do not provide adequate notice to students regarding Cal Poly Pomona’s policies on free expression. For example, the Student Life webpage on the Cal Poly Pomona website provides links to the Interim Freedom of Expression Policy (dated 2002) and the 2008 Presidential Order policies, but not the 2014 Presidential Order.
The inconsistent policies allow administrators to pick and choose provisions that they are going to enforce, allowing them unlimited discretion to promote or silence speech based on its content or the identity of the speaker.
Cal Poly Pomona vows to respect your free speech rights, provided you inform the administration 10 days in advance, are granted permission to speak and are willing to wear a speech permit while remaining in the properly-designated area. That's just not how free speech works. Tomas is hoping his lawsuit will result in the school's policies being found unconstitutional. Even if Tomas can't get the constitutionality declaration and permanent injunction he's requesting (along with damages and costs), maybe his efforts will push the school to reconsider its policies.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: first amendment, free speech, free speech permit, nicolas tomas
Companies: cal poly, cal poly pamona
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Brilliant analysis, Tim. Keep up the good work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Whoops, looks like fifth grade recess is ending... back to class, now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What is your purpose here? It's certainly not to encourage a meaningful debate. Nor it is to correct misrepresentation in articles. It seems only to be to attack and discredit the website and/or its authors. At least, that's what it appears to be, I could be wrong.
Care to explain?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I usually enjoy reading your counter points on constitution law and other legal related posts. I don't always agree with you, but you make good arguments. I wish you would stop the petty sniping against the actual authors on this site, and concentrate on the topic itself. It really detracts from your credibility, and causes people not to give you credit when you do contribute to the discussions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
AntiDirt is one of the authors?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"but you make good arguments"
"your credibility"
You're being far, far too kind. You can polish a turd, but a turd is still a turd.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
On the contrary, the First Amendment doctrine in this context is complicated, with forum analysis, levels of scrutiny, etc. You and Tim assume you understand this complicated doctrine. I don't think either of you do. I was merely pointing out that Tim's conclusory claim that this is "just not how free speech works" is bullshit. If he wants to draw a legal conclusion, then he should back it up with actual analysis. Or else it's just more faith-based FUD, which is exactly what his (and your) claim is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Thats all that you said there to me, sycophant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the 1st ammendment doesnt end at College,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
JustShutUpAndObey didn't define what "sea" this stretches to. It could stretch from the sea just west of Spain and the sea just East of Japan. I kinda wish it would stretch from the bottom of the Marianas Trench to the "sea" outside of the orbit of Pluto, or maybe anywhere except the set of null (so maybe not in a black hole,) but I can dream.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech Zone
On the other, I'd like to be able to get to class without having to push through a crowd of assorted activists screaming in my face. Or use the open field by my dorm for recreation (its designated purpose).
The idea of Free Speech zones is somewhat distasteful, and the idea of needing a permit, etc. to use them is flat out wrong. But the schools do have to make sure that the protests ate not aggressive or interfering with other student activities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
Before there were "free speech zones", this was a problem? Admittedly more than a few years ago (get off my lawn!) my campus allowed activism without any restraint and I never had the problem you are referring to. Sure, sometimes it was almost as annoying as the scouts at the supermarket, but I never saw it as a problem that needed solving.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech Zone
What's a minor nuisance weighed against one of the key enablers of effective modern governance?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noisy rabble rousers! Why don't they take their problems elsewhere so that I can sleep!?
Part of being a human being in a large society is our responsibility to have concern and awareness for those of us who are worse off. Even if we cannot directly support them in a way that lifts them out of their circumstance, the least we can do is tolerate when they make noise to raise awareness of their sorry lot.
And if you're not willing to do even that, to tolerate people crying for help, then you don't deserve the sweet, sweet fruits of the massive infrastructure that comes with having a huge society (e.g. electricity, running water, internet, WiFi hotspots everywhere, and so on.)
And getting back to the original topic, these campus regulations of free speech are institutionalized intolerance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
There are existing, non-Constitutionally-challenged laws that already address this. If a crowd is actually impeding traffic (even foot traffic), that's violating those laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
Getting up in someone's grill or screaming loudly to disrupt a speaker is no longer peaceable.
It's funny how a lot of people on the left like to march in an scream at political functions but cordon off people wanting to do political work at their campuses. Double Standard much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
If you have teeming masses of students protesting each other, sounds like its a "cupcake" college where the degree you earn will soon be worth nada.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech Zone
Is this what you fear? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qse_wf57tZM
:)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is a social experiment by libs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is a social experiment by libs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It is a social experiment by libs
And you know for a fact there are no Conservative or Libertarian Vegans?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You keep using that word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You keep using that word.
liberal (USA) - left wing radical
liberal (Dictionary cherry picked) - free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Liberalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You keep using that word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You keep using that word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You keep using that word.
Before then, apparently Republicans used to brag about how liberal they were.
Funny thing; back then, Republicans and Democrats weren't sharply divided into left-wing/right-wing camps. This is a Rovian thing, I think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Rove Strategy...
Though Wikipedia states that the southern strategy has roots before Nixon's campaign. 1968 is when it was laid out plainly, where targets, negrophobes were specifically identified and the recognition of dog whistle politics -- where you couldn't outright promise to marginalize and chase off the blacks but just imply it a lot -- was acknowledged as relevant and necessary.
Rove simply extended the Southern Strategy to contemporary values politics where campaigns focus on implications of getting rid of gays, minority races, slutty women and non-Christians, and the people don't care how else GOP representatives behave... which is how they can cause the US government to shut down over the ACA and still have political careers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Conservative vegans
Speaking of brainwashing young, impressionable minds, last I checked, it was GOP platforms that were pushing to teach creationism and abstinence only sex ed in public schools, to allow churches to present mandatory-attendance programs in to public school students, and to remove critical thinking from school curricula in order to encourage obedience towards authority.
I reckon that authority would include TSA officers who grope them excessively.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is a social experiment by libs
"Free speech zones were also used in New York City at the 2004 Republican National Convention."
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone#Bill_Neel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Next test
Assuming they don't deny the application, on the day of the protest/distribution in the 'allowed zone', have someone else distribute the exact same flyers 'outside' of the zone.
Grab popcorn and watch bureaucratic explode.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A new college anthem ..
And never have opinions of your own,
Then any day you'll have your say and I shan't even blink
You'll find that perfect tolerance is shown,
But if instead you use your head and think things for yourself,
I shall ensure a large policeman calls.
True liberty applies to me, all else stays on the shelf,
No other rights pertain within these walls.
One Man One Vote, I am that man,
I do these things because I can!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SARCASM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free speech Zone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ahhh yes...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real story is that the vast majority of the students and faculty are so cowed by the security state, so ignorant of their rights and so fearful in general that they are unwilling to push back.
I went to UC Berkeley back in the '70s. Any attempt to do anything even remotely like this would have been met with a furious storm of protests and demonstrations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Deja vu all over again
I guess California colleges just want to keep on keepin' on...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deja vu all over again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As has been stated by others earlier, those are not free speech issues, and are already covered by other policies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Preparing for real life
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Students should find other schools to attend!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hopefully the transfer process would be easy.
Also, hopefully they use all the same books. And any part of your tuition that is pre-paid is refunded.
Also hopefully there's a worthwhile accredited university nearby.
So far whenever we're not talking about weekly groceries, I've noticed it's really difficult for end consumers to vote with their wallet about anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Permit pending...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Permit pending...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How is that relevant to a university that, even though funded by the state, is not actually a part of the state?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for free speech. I just don't think the constitution guarantees it except for restricting the government itself from trying to shut it down.
I could be wrong, no doubt there are more learned folk than I here, in which case I'd like to be educated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Take the state police, as a gross example. Under the theory you propose, even though the police were instituted by and funded by the government, they would not "actually be a part of the government" and so would not have to respect your rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Regardless, though, the sidewalks and accessways on a campus -- even a private campus -- that the general public is allowed access to is treated as a public space. So the first amendement applies. Just ask the owners of shopping malls who've lost lawsuits over this very point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]