Why Speech Codes Endure
Protecting free speech on campus has become a Herculean task.
Author Profile
Greg Lukianoff
Greg Lukianoff is the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and has been with FIRE since 2001. He is a member of the State Bar of California and the bar of the Supreme Court of the United States. Greg is the author of Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship and the End of American Debate and has published articles in the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the New York Times, the <Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, the New York Post, the Stanford Technology Law Review, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Reason, and numerous other publications. He is a blogger for the Huffington Post and wroted a chapter in Templeton Press's anthology New Threats to Freedom, edited by Adam Bellow.Greg is a frequent guest on local and national syndicated radio programs, has represented FIRE on numerous national television shows, and has testified before the U.S. Senate about free speech issues on America's campuses. In 2008 he was the first recipient of the Playboy Foundation Freedom of Expression Award and in 2010 he received Ford Hall Forum's Louis P. and Evelyn Smith First Amendment Award on behalf of FIRE.
Greg is a graduate of American University and of Stanford Law School. efore joining FIRE, Greg practiced law in Northern California, interned at the ACLU of Northern California and the Organization for Aid to Refugees in Prague, Czech Republic, and was the development manager of the EnvironMentors Project in Washington, D.C.
Articles by Greg Lukianoff
UNC-Chapel Hill Tries to Spin Away a Major Defeat
In July of 2004, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) wrote to UNC-Chapel Hill, explaining for the second time in less than two years that constitutionally protected freedom of association is meaningless if a group cannot exclude people who do not share the beliefs of the group. This is both basic common sense and clearly established law. The College Democrats can exclude Republicans, the college environmental club can exclude students who hate environmentalism, and the college chess club can exclude members who hate the game and wish to see it abolished. In other words, if you form a group in order to express commonly held ideas or ideals, of course you can exclude those who disagree.
UNC Should Pay Closer Attention to the First Amendment
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson wrote in the landmark case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) that “if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.” His words were a ringing affirmation of the freedoms of conscience and expression that are central to American liberty.
Unfortunately, however, the notion that the government may not dictate what people may express or believe about controversial subjects has remained hotly contested. Those in power inevitably find it convenient to restrict expression or even dictate matters of conscience in order to ensure a more “just,” “fair,” or “orderly” society or organization.
Today, rules and regulations that restrict expression or dictate matters of conscience are often found at college or university campuses—including at the 16 schools that comprise the University of North Carolina System. As public institutions—agencies of the State of North Carolina—the universities in the UNC System are legally bound to uphold the First Amendment rights of their students and faculty. Unfortunately, they are failing miserably.