🐱 University of Wisconsin System Passes Dangerous New Policy That Expels Students for Protest

CatParty
http://www.theroot.com/university-of-wisconsin-passes-dangerous-new-policy-tha-1819244271

It’s good to know that the First Amendment is protected on college campuses. Not.

The University of Wisconsin recently approved a policy that will suspend or expel students who disrupt campus speeches and presentations—because they are infringing on others’ free speech—an ironic and dangerous threat to the right to protest everywhere.

The Associated Press reports that the Board of Regents adopted the language in a vote on Friday. The policy states that students found to have twice engaged in “violence or other disorderly conduct” would be suspended. Three times and you’re out (expelled.)


The new Wisconsin policy is similar to Republican legislation the state Assembly passed in June, though it has not been ratified by the state Senate. It comes on the heels of several schools including the University of California-Berkeley that have cancelled conservative speakers due to protests that have sometimes gotten violent.

The AP reports that Regents President John Robert Behling told the board before Friday’s vote that adopting the policy ahead of the legislation shows “a responsiveness to what’s going on in the Capitol, which helps build relationships.”

Republican Gov. Scott Walker appointed all but two of the board’s 18 members.

“Perhaps the most important thing we can do as a university is to teach students how to engage and listen to those with whom they differ,” said system President Ray Cross. “If we don’t show students how to do this, who will? Without civil discourse and a willingness to listen and engage with different voices, all we are doing is reinforcing our existing values.”


State public schools Superintendent Tony Evers, on the board by virtue of his position, and Democratic candidate running against Walker in next year’s gubernatorial election, cast the only dissenting vote.

“This policy will chill and suppress free speech on this campus and all campuses,” Evers said.

“Who’s going to show up to a protest if they think they could be potentially expelled?” asks Democratic State Rep. Chris Taylor.

A senior at the university, Savion Castro, accused the regents of “capitulating to a band of right-wing extremists.”

Regent Regina Millner defended the resolution at the meeting, saying it’s designed to promote listening.

“I don’t consider drowning out another speaker as freedom of speech,” Millner said. “That doesn’t qualify.”


What’s next? Arrest for protesting the national anthem during football games? Exorbitant fines for protest against police brutality?

At this point, it wouldn’t surprise me at all. Keep an eye on these state legislatures, people.
 
“Perhaps the most important thing we can do as a university is to teach students how to engage and listen to those with whom they differ,” said system President Ray Cross. “If we don’t show students how to do this, who will? Without civil discourse and a willingness to listen and engage with different voices, all we are doing is reinforcing our existing values.”
I guess this is a bad thing now?
 
But what will they do if the BLM or ANTIFA NEETs aren't students of that particular Uni?
snorlax-jpg.250324


Checkmate
 
http://www.theroot.com/university-of-wisconsin-passes-dangerous-new-policy-tha-1819244271

It’s good to know that the First Amendment is protected on college campuses. Not.

Anything getting federal funds (and in this case state funds) is required to obey the law, including the Constitution, as it is effectively a state actor.

That doesn't mean every form of protest is protected, and "violence or other disorderly conduct" is already stuff that is illegal. Free speech doesn't mean the right to commit violent crimes to force other people to shut up.

Free speech is also generally subject to "reasonable time, place and manner restrictions." For instance, you could reasonably be prohibited from walking into a classroom and disrupting the class by emitting piercing shrieks through a bullhorn.

"Disorderly conduct" is a fairly broad category of illegal things, and that kind of language is a bit troubling, but laws such as this have to be construed so as not to prohibit protected speech.

What is prohibited under the First Amendment is what is called "viewpoint discrimination," where speech that would otherwise be allowed is prohibited solely because of the views it expresses, not because of the manner in which it is conducted.

Anyway I thought the people trying to shut down other viewpoints with violence were of the general attitude "lol freeze peach" and didn't think the First Amendment even exists.
 
“Perhaps the most important thing we can do as a university is to teach students how to engage and listen to those with whom they differ. If we don’t show students how to do this, who will? Without civil discourse and a willingness to listen and engage with different voices, all we are doing is reinforcing our existing values.”
Someone, somewhere misread that as “break all my windows and set my car on fire”.
 
UW-Wisconsin is where all the radical leftist, Weather Underground terrorist, womyn/gender studies bullshit was birthed and continues to fester. And since the left always wants to look SUPER PROGRESSIVETM (original political thoughtz; donut steel), they undoubtedly thought CURBING Freedom of Expression was somehow ENHANCING it.

Personally, I don't give a shit. Multiple Trigglypuffs are going to go batshit and get booted out of school. lol
 
Maybe they should have learned rioting is not protesting

That's the funny thing.

Right there in the article itself, they clearly don't get that righteous window breaking is still window breaking.....

"Interrupting a person with a bullhorn and hsouting them down is not free speech" says the politician, completely reasonable. And their response without a hint of irony likely is "OMG OMG! THEY ENDORSE HATE SPEECH! SILENCE THEM!"
 
That's the funny thing.

Right there in the article itself, they clearly don't get that righteous window breaking is still window breaking.....

"Interrupting a person with a bullhorn and hsouting them down is not free speech" says the politician, completely reasonable. And their response without a hint of irony likely is "OMG OMG! THEY ENDORSE HATE SPEECH! SILENCE THEM!"


It's also pretty ironic since their the same one who shout Hate speech is not free speech
 
They probably had to add this rule because Antifas, BLM nuts, and other assorted autists were screaming and trying to get on stage during speeches and events.

It doesn't say they can't protest. It says they can't DISRUPTIVELY protest. So if they wanna sperg out somewhere outside or in a permitted area, it's probably fine. But if they wanna sperg out in an auditorium where someone is giving a speech, they're gonna get in trouble.
 
They probably had to add this rule because Antifas, BLM nuts, and other assorted autists were screaming and trying to get on stage during speeches and events.

This and to prevent another situation like with Evergreen College where students had roving gangs harassing students and professors and the staff were either too cucked or leading the students in their terror to do anything.
 
Back