Supreme Court Removes Barrier to Protecting First Amendment
dailysignal.com
dailysignal.com
That's some great precedent there for 2nd Amendment folks if SCOTUS'll ever grant certiorari for a case. Tack on some nominal damage, and you leave one less out for the authorities to wiggle out of having precedent set.
The majority made the common-sense ruling that simply changing a policy does not moot a claim of harm that occurred while the policy in force, which has long been the go-to argument for institutions enacting bad policy.
What this ruling means is that the original suit can proceed. It says nothing about the merits of the original suit, just that the claimants actually do meet the minimum bar of standing after all.
A lot of 'religious' speech, can be straight up hate speech. Something tells me they weren't preaching not to eat meat on fridays?
It seems like, yes, his first amendment right were violated. While I may not like religion, he certainly should be allowed to hand out pamphlets as long as he's not being agressive about it.
They got to abuse his constitutional rights and they pay his attorneys fees + $1 as recompense?
I mean, what? We should censor speech because they may say something we don't like? That's madness, one, and two, antithetical to the mission of the institution as a public University. There should be penalties for incompetent Administrators who overstep or abuse their authority by unilaterally attemptimg to abolish a fundamental civil right.
When an article neglects to mention what exactly the student was saying, it's a very good indication that it wasn't a kind and gentle message.