Expelled Oklahoma U fraternity to sue university, possibly President Boren

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

That is typical legalistic weaseling.

Saying they weren't expelled for their speech, but for the "code of conduct", is wholly dishonest. The claimed abridgement of the "code of conduct" was their speech, thus they were expelled for the words they said . Look if you are go about advocating expelling people from school for saying the nagger word, have the balls to stand behind your convictions.

But in reality, you are a liar and know your position is morally untenable, so you have to come up with dishonest arguments like this. Not only are your speech codes immoral and repressive absent the law, they are a violation of 1A and standing case law on the matter.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

I hope you die a painful death you piece of shit.

Sic Semper Tyrannis

 

[Steinlight]

Your unspecified code of conduct is immoral and illegal under the Constitution and established case law.

Hopefully these kids won't shut the fuck up and will run this piece of shit school through the court system, because they will win. Squeeze every penny out of them that they can.

Yeah, try getting this in front of a jury, and then show that jury the tape. That's going to be a lost cause.

Your case is the lost cause. The "jury is out" on this as far as case law goes.

Independent of the 1st Amendment, your government imposed speech codes are immoral. Not to mention, just dumb and petty. Expelling kids for a edgy joke they made at a private party with friends is over the top by any standard of cultural normalcy. Political correctness in this culture is out of control and repressive.

 

[rightwinger]

In this case, it was the feelings of an entire university

Sucks being a racist these days doesn't it?

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Oklahoma University is the government, it is a public university and a state institution, and thus held to the first amendment.

So yes, the 1st Amendment absolutely protects you from the consequences of government action against you.

I was in the government for 33 years. I hired and fired people

If I had exercised my free speech by screaming I would never hire a n*gger, I would have been fired

There are still consequences for what you say

 

[JoeB131]

Your case is the lost cause. The "jury is out" on this as far as case law goes.

Independent of the 1st Amendment, your government imposed speech codes are immoral. Not to mention, just dumb and petty. Expelling kids for a edgy joke they made at a private party with friends is over the top by any standard of cultural normalcy. Political correctness in this culture is out of control and repressive.

Actually, I thought it was totally appropriate. so did the frat these guys belong to when they disassociated themselves from the whole chapter.

 

[rightwinger]

Nope, entirely different situation, you are talking about someone publicly harassing someone at a private firm and a state institution enacting speech codes against someone for what they said among friends at a private function. In fact, the two scenarios is the exact opposite of one another. I at your example.

But please, tell us more about this "code of conduct" that overrides the 1A and established case law on this exact issue .

It is absolutely offensive. It was deliberately edgy humor. I thought it was funny, but maybe that isn't for baby ears like you. It doesn't change the fact that the State are unquestionably the immoral actors for levying punishment upon someone for their speech. Speech codes, particularly for what is said in private, are morally egregious.

You should move on from this issue and into oncoming traffic you worthless piece of shit.

Actually, what they need to do is shut the fuck up and hope they can find another college to take them.

Code of Conduct. They violated it. They're done.

Your unspecified code of conduct is immoral and illegal under the Constitution and established case law.

Hopefully these kids won't shut the fuck up and will run this piece of shit school through the court system, because they will win. Squeeze every penny out of them that they can.

How is a code of conduct that expels you for repulsive behavior "immoral"?

 

[Steinlight]

Papish v. Board of Curators is not applicable to the incident that occurred at OU, as Papish concerned the First Amendment and the University's effort to prohibit the ongoing distribution of material it considered to be obscene, where the University failed to justify the prohibition of the speech pursuant to “the enforce[ment of] reasonable regulations as to the time, place, and manner of speech and its dissemination.”

The expulsion of the OU students had nothing to do with their speech, it was not done in an effort to prohibit the dissemination of their speech, it was not done as a punitive response to their speech, where in theory the students could return to an appropriate venue at OU as private citizens to advocate that African-Americans not be allowed to join a given fraternity.

In order for the expelled OU students to make a First Amendment violation claim they must establish that the expulsion was done in an effort to preempt or restrict their speech, which clearly it was not.

They were clearly punished by the State for their speech. The so called "breach" of the "code of conduct" was their speech.

The 1st Amendment protects those students who disseminate "indecent material" on campus from action by the State, so it certainly protects students who make edgy jokes at private functions from action by the State.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Nope, entirely different situation, you are talking about someone publicly harassing someone at a private firm and a state institution enacting speech codes against someone for what they said among friends at a private function. In fact, the two scenarios is the exact opposite of one another. I at your example.

But please, tell us more about this "code of conduct" that overrides the 1A and established case law on this exact issue .

It is absolutely offensive. It was deliberately edgy humor. I thought it was funny, but maybe that isn't for baby ears like you. It doesn't change the fact that the State are unquestionably the immoral actors for levying punishment upon someone for their speech. Speech codes, particularly for what is said in private, are morally egregious.

You should move on from this issue and into oncoming traffic you worthless piece of shit.

Actually, what they need to do is shut the fuck up and hope they can find another college to take them.

Code of Conduct. They violated it. They're done.

Your unspecified code of conduct is immoral and illegal under the Constitution and established case law.

Hopefully these kids won't shut the fuck up and will run this piece of shit school through the court system, because they will win. Squeeze every penny out of them that they can.

How is a code of conduct that expels you for repulsive behavior "immoral"?

It's not.

Advocating that African-Americans be lynched clearly contributes to creating a hostile environment in violation of school policy, where the students' continued attendance is predicated on adherence that that policy, and violation of that policy indeed warrants expulsion.

 

[Steinlight]

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Oklahoma University is the government, it is a public university and a state institution, and thus held to the first amendment.

So yes, the 1st Amendment absolutely protects you from the consequences of government action against you.

I was in the government for 33 years. I hired and fired people

If I had exercised my free speech by screaming I would never hire a n*gger, I would have been fired

There are still consequences for what you say

These aren't worthless dead end government employees like you, these are good kids, students with edgy senses of humor. There is no equivalency legally or morally.

As far as the rights of students go, as per 1A and case law, they are protected from retribution by the State for their speech.

 

[rightwinger]

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Oklahoma University is the government, it is a public university and a state institution, and thus held to the first amendment.

So yes, the 1st Amendment absolutely protects you from the consequences of government action against you.

I was in the government for 33 years. I hired and fired people

If I had exercised my free speech by screaming I would never hire a n*gger, I would have been fired

There are still consequences for what you say

These aren't worthless dead end government employees like you, these are good kids, students with edgy senses of humor. There is no equivalency legally or morally.

As far as the rights of students go, as per 1A and case law, they are protected from retribution by the State for their speech.

You are getting just plain repulsive right now

You should have quit while you were ahead

 

[Steinlight]

Nope, entirely different situation, you are talking about someone publicly harassing someone at a private firm and a state institution enacting speech codes against someone for what they said among friends at a private function. In fact, the two scenarios is the exact opposite of one another. I at your example.

But please, tell us more about this "code of conduct" that overrides the 1A and established case law on this exact issue .

It is absolutely offensive. It was deliberately edgy humor. I thought it was funny, but maybe that isn't for baby ears like you. It doesn't change the fact that the State are unquestionably the immoral actors for levying punishment upon someone for their speech. Speech codes, particularly for what is said in private, are morally egregious.

You should move on from this issue and into oncoming traffic you worthless piece of shit.

Actually, what they need to do is shut the fuck up and hope they can find another college to take them.

Code of Conduct. They violated it. They're done.

Your unspecified code of conduct is immoral and illegal under the Constitution and established case law.

Hopefully these kids won't shut the fuck up and will run this piece of shit school through the court system, because they will win. Squeeze every penny out of them that they can.

How is a code of conduct that expels you for repulsive behavior "immoral"?

Speech control is thought control. The State levying punishments on individuals for their speech is immoral by shared historical western standards of morality which value free speech a paramount in a free society.

The reality is, you are a repulsive one, advocating using the State to punish people for engaging in "wrong speak"

 

[Steinlight]

No, you are all immoral. You want to ruin people's lives and throw them out of school because they make politically incorrect jokes with friends in private. You are bad people without a moral compass.

 

[Steinlight]

Your case is the lost cause. The "jury is out" on this as far as case law goes.

Independent of the 1st Amendment, your government imposed speech codes are immoral. Not to mention, just dumb and petty. Expelling kids for a edgy joke they made at a private party with friends is over the top by any standard of cultural normalcy. Political correctness in this culture is out of control and repressive.

Actually, I thought it was totally appropriate. so did the frat these guys belong to when they disassociated themselves from the whole chapter.

The SAE national organization fearing politically correct retribution taking private action to mitigate fall out does not justify the State violating these kids' rights.

 

[PratchettFan]

Because, like it or not, racists have the same rights as everyone else. If you take away their rights, your rights go with it. If you aren't willing to stand up for the rights of people you hate, you don't deserve anyone to stand up for you.

Yes they do

They have the right to be held accountable for their actions, just like everyone else. By everyone except conservatives who will defend to the death the right to scream N*gger

The big question is, why aren't you willing to defend it?

I am under no obligation to defend repulsive behavior or those ho are punished because of it

Then you don't deserve the right yourself. Free speech means everyone or it means no one.

They were free to chant any repulsive thing they want......
The university is free to expel them for it

Nobody can compel a university to admit blatant racists

Then you have absolutely no concept of what freedom is or what it means.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Say something against a protected group = get your life destroyed.

And we call our selfs the land of the free? Don't make me laugh.

 

[PratchettFan]

They were expelled because of what they said. The university is a government entity, an arm of the state. Not a private institution. How is that not a violation of their right to free speech?

Let's go over it: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The university, as an extension of government, falls under that prohibition. It doesn't say unless the speech is icky, or insults people, or clearly shows the speaker to be a total twit. If the university can prohibit one kind of speech, no matter how disgusting and idiotic, it can prohibit other kinds of speech as well. The kid on the video was an asshole. As far as I know, the entire frat was a collection of assholes. But assholes have as much right to spew repulsive nonsense as anyone else.

Still looking for the law that was passed.

It was passed when the Constitution was ratified.

Congress shall pass no law...

What law was passed infringing free speech? Who went to jail?

The students were expelled by an arm of the government. If you don't see that as infringing on them, then it is pointless to even talk to you.

So?

I worked 33 years for the government and would have been fired if I screamed I would lynch any n*gger who wanted to work for me

As an employee, you were the government. The students in this case are not employees. They have the same status as any other citizen.

 

[PratchettFan]

Guess racists don't have 1st ammendment rights. Don't you see the problem here. The first ammendment doesn't only protect speech that we like or agree with, it protects speech that we hate or disagree with.

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Oklahoma University is the government, it is a public university and a state institution, and thus held to the first amendment.

So yes, the 1st Amendment absolutely protects you from the consequences of government action against you.

Amazing how a right in the Constitution, Leftists don't recognize, but if this university had discriminated against gay people, which ISN'T protected by the Constitution, then they would be up in arms.

Gay people are protected under the constitution. Just like everyone else.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Nope, entirely different situation, you are talking about someone publicly harassing someone at a private firm and a state institution enacting speech codes against someone for what they said among friends at a private function. In fact, the two scenarios is the exact opposite of one another. I at your example.

But please, tell us more about this "code of conduct" that overrides the 1A and established case law on this exact issue .

It is absolutely offensive. It was deliberately edgy humor. I thought it was funny, but maybe that isn't for baby ears like you. It doesn't change the fact that the State are unquestionably the immoral actors for levying punishment upon someone for their speech. Speech codes, particularly for what is said in private, are morally egregious.

You should move on from this issue and into oncoming traffic you worthless piece of shit.

Actually, what they need to do is shut the fuck up and hope they can find another college to take them.

Code of Conduct. They violated it. They're done.

Your unspecified code of conduct is immoral and illegal under the Constitution and established case law.

Hopefully these kids won't shut the fuck up and will run this piece of shit school through the court system, because they will win. Squeeze every penny out of them that they can.

How is a code of conduct that expels you for repulsive behavior "immoral"?

It's not.

Advocating that African-Americans be lynched clearly contributes to creating a hostile environment in violation of school policy, where the students' continued attendance is predicated on adherence that that policy, and violation of that policy indeed warrants expulsion.

The kind of speech that inspired the 1st Amendment was King George being burned in effigy, not even remotely as benign as some college students joking about nggrs. You seem to think that the 1st Amendment only applies to speech you approve of, like all despotic Leftists who in their heart despise freedom and civil right protections afforded by the Constitution.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You have no understanding of the first amendment

It never says there can be no consequences for what you say

Expulsion is one of those consequences

Yes, in fact the First Amendment is all about consequences. In fact, that is the entire point. It protects you from the State abridging your right to free speech, such as in a State institution implementing speech codes and levying punishment upon you for your speech.

I know this and I am not even an American. Your Bill of Rights is still one of the few things I love about your country and admire them for.

Looks like you need a refresher on your own Constitution

Legally, the University doesn't have a leg to stand on.

PAPISH v. UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI CURATORS, 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Expulsion of student for distributing on campus a publication assertedly containing "indecent speech" proscribed by a bylaw of a state university's Board of Curators held an impermissible violation of her First Amendment free speech rights since the mere dissemination of ideas on a state university campus cannot be proscribed in the name of "conventions of decency."

Certiorari granted; 464 F.2d 136, reversed.

FindLaw Cases and Codes

You have no concept of freedom of speech. It prohibits the government from taking action against you for what you might say

It does nothing to protect you from the consequences of your actions

Oklahoma University is the government, it is a public university and a state institution, and thus held to the first amendment.

So yes, the 1st Amendment absolutely protects you from the consequences of government action against you.

Amazing how a right in the Constitution, Leftists don't recognize, but if this university had discriminated against gay people, which ISN'T protected by the Constitution, then they would be up in arms.

Gay people are protected under the constitution. Just like everyone else.

Equal treatment under the law, not special treatment. And they are not a protected class such as color, race, religion, or previous condition of servitude.

So, no to that.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

They weren't employed by the government.

No, they were in an agreement with a university that they would get a college education in exchange for living up to a student code of conduct. Which they failed to live up to.

I guess that will be up for the courts to decide.

The First Amendment isn't there to protect popular speech. It's there to protect unpopular speech, else it wouldn't be needed in the first place.

I've seen plenty of incidents in the past year of anti-Semitic speech right out on public grounds of universities in front of hundreds of students and nothing happened to those instigators.

That's because you guys keep pretending that criticism of Israel is anti-semitism.

Oh really, Joe? Is that the reason?

UCLA s Student Council Tries To Hide Video Of Its Members Questioning A Jewish Student

 

[Liminal]

No, you are all immoral. You want to ruin people's lives and throw them out of school because they make politically incorrect jokes with friends in private. You are bad people without a moral compass.

I'd say your morality is in question here. When the time comes, God isn't going to look more favorably upon you for being a tacit supporter of racism, rather than simply just another rabid bigot.