Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Emory Law Student Govt. Denies Recognition to Free Speech Group Claiming Open Discussion Could Cause ‘Harm’

Emory Law Student Govt. Denies Recognition to Free Speech Group Claiming Open Discussion Could Cause ‘Harm’

“will likely give rise to a precarious environment – one where the conversation might very easily devolve”

Pretty much every time you hear of a campus group objecting to free speech, it’s the left that’s doing it.

From the FIRE blog:

Citing the ‘harm’ of open discussion, Emory Law’s student government denies recognition to student free speech group

Emory University’s laudable free speech promises mean nothing to the Emory Law Student Bar Association, which denied recognition to a free-speech-focused student group because open discussion could cause “harm.”

Today, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education called on Emory Law to promptly process the Emory Free Speech Forum’s application for a charter. FIRE first wrote to the school on Nov. 1 and received no response.

“The rejection of the Emory Free Speech Forum exemplifies the exact reason why this club must exist,” said Michael Reed-Price, president of EFSF. “Emory Law School’s Student Bar Association values free speech only so long as the ideas are in line with their viewpoint. The SBA need not agree with our ideas, they must merely tolerate our right to express them.”

Emory University is one of the few institutions in the country to earn a “green light” rating from FIRE for its speech-protective policies. Seeking to bolster this commitment to free speech, EFSF is a non-partisan student group “devoted to fostering critical discourse and open dialogue surrounding important issues in law and society.” In October, the group applied for a charter from the SBA, which would allow EFSF to seek university funding and use university resources.

EFSF satisfied all criteria for recognition. However, several SBA members objected to the speakers the group sought to host, the group’s decision to forgo moderators for its discussion-based events, and the group’s perceived similarity to the Federalist Society and the American Constitution Society.

The SBA ultimately rejected EFSF’s application, citing the “nature of this group” and speculating that EFSF’s discussions “will likely give rise to a precarious environment – one where the conversation might very easily devolve.” The SBA admitted it was “hesitant to issue a charter when there are no apparent safeguards in place to prevent potential and real harm that could result from these discussions[.]”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

They aren’t wrong…group sounds like a honey trap for cancellation of fair-minded individuals by the left.

Law schools are supposed to contain fairly mature students who are comfortable arguing principles for their clients. Why do they seem to be the biggest babies when it comes to “offensive” speech?

Law Dean: “Petition rejected under the principle of fustibus et lapidibus potest ossa mea confringe.

Steven Brizel | January 11, 2022 at 7:33 pm

Law school education should include respect for differing views and constitutional guarantees and creating snowflakes with law degrees In CLT

Ask what they are afraid of, and why.
.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Accessibility by WAH
Send this to a friend