University should have no discretion to limit free speech
Every citizen of the United States has likely been offended by the speech of others at one point in their lives. This is almost a guarantee.
Anti-war protests offend those that support war efforts.
Pro-choice and pro-life rallies offend each other equally.
With the unrest in the Middle East, there are often dueling protests between pro-Israel and pro-Palestine camps which inevitably leave both sides jaded and upset by the rhetoric being launched by the other.
Citizens of this country need to realize that they do not have a constitutional right to not be offended. This is a natural part of living in a free society.
On the other hand, the right of people to launch offensive and even extreme rhetoric is a tradition that has been upheld by every single government since the founding of this nation, and it will continue as long as we hold true to the standards of liberty that we claim to espouse.
George Lincoln Rockwell was allowed to hold rallies supporting the Nazi regime in Germany in front of the White House, and that right was not infringed upon.
The Westboro Baptist Church, despite being disdained almost universally by the citizenry of America, has been able to speak their minds and spew their extreme religious beliefs in public. The average person might ask why we, as the people of this country, would allow such hate-filled speech to be protected by the Constitution.
The simple answer is that if speech is limited, any of the other constitutional rights we enjoy can also be limited.
If their speech is determined to be too hateful justifying the ban on such speech, can Bernie Sanders be censored for calling himself a socialist since opponents will state that socialism invokes images of Stalin and Lenin? Can a Republican candidate be censored for stating that he is in favor of traditional marriage since it invokes offense toward the LGBTQ+ community?
The obvious answer to these questions is that none of these statements can be limited and none should be limited.
The official free speech policy at the university states that free speech will be limited to Inman field, the area north of Old Main, and other areas “as approved.”
All free speech activities must be approved by the director of the Muenster University Center administration.
Furthermore, free speech activities will be limited to the hours of 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and only on weekdays. The university also institutes a requirement that students submit a request three days prior to their planned use of their First Amendment rights.
The power that the university has to limit free speech on campus should make one wonder what other amendments to the Constitution they have the power to disregard.
It should not be up to the school’s administration to determine to what extent these amendments apply. Our Supreme Court has addressed this issue on dozens of occasions and they universally agree that speech, no matter what form it takes, must be protected at all costs.
The university must end this practice of limiting free speech and allow for students to express themselves in any manner they see fit.
USD is a public university and must be treated as such, meaning that they are responsible for upholding the Constitution and allowing the rights guaranteed in it to permeate across campus with no ramifications. Time and time again, we remind the university that they are funded by taxpayer dollars and are technically owned by every citizen of South Dakota.
The university doesn’t have the right to infringe upon the rights of those that enter the grounds of the campus.
There are already laws in place to keep order and structure within the university or any other public place.
Disturbing the peace, harassment or indecency can all be invoked to deal with matters that are out of control. Local and state laws already exist to make sure we still have a smooth society while not infringing upon the rights of the citizens. The free speech policy at USD needs to be reevaluated.
