An example of how free speech is regulated and exorcised on public university campuses is illustrated well with Dean Saxton, also known as Brother Dean. At the University of Arizona, it is not uncommon to witness activism and free expression. Due to the university being a public college, a student attending the University of Arizona will not only observe the UA students, but guest speakers as well.
As a student attending a public university, the circumstances will be common that the student body will join to demonstrate protests and walk-outs as well as student activists and individual community members disseminating their thoughts and beliefs. Though the UA does elicit standards for free speech regulation:
“The University may regulate the …show more content…
This can be seen with such cases as Tinker and Healy. Riester is also quoted, giving examples of what would constitute an overreach of free speech on the University campus that is subject to corrective action and restrain. Such standards include: the university being able to place restrictions and regulate the place, manner and time of free speech occurring on campus, and that the university primarily looks at whether speech is disruptive or not to the surrounding areas (UA Policy and Regulations Governing the Use of the Campus, 2012, p. 1). Thus, Brother Dean’s actions must disrupt the surrounding …show more content…
192). So where is the line drawn, this will be a question asked throughout this paper. Knowing the line is vague and has no conclusive answer, but in the case with Brother Dean there was an overstep from free speech to assault, a clear breach of university policy and a cross over to threatening behavior. As Kathy Adams Riester: “My best hope is that students understand that their right to freedom of speech, as well as everyone else’s and the ability to say and share what you’re thinking is really important,” continuing. “But it’s also important to practice respect to each other, and violence is never an answer when you disagree with speech. Really the answer is more speech” (The Daily Wildcat,
As a student attending a public university, the circumstances will be common that the student body will join to demonstrate protests and walk-outs as well as student activists and individual community members disseminating their thoughts and beliefs. Though the UA does elicit standards for free speech regulation:
“The University may regulate the …show more content…
This can be seen with such cases as Tinker and Healy. Riester is also quoted, giving examples of what would constitute an overreach of free speech on the University campus that is subject to corrective action and restrain. Such standards include: the university being able to place restrictions and regulate the place, manner and time of free speech occurring on campus, and that the university primarily looks at whether speech is disruptive or not to the surrounding areas (UA Policy and Regulations Governing the Use of the Campus, 2012, p. 1). Thus, Brother Dean’s actions must disrupt the surrounding …show more content…
192). So where is the line drawn, this will be a question asked throughout this paper. Knowing the line is vague and has no conclusive answer, but in the case with Brother Dean there was an overstep from free speech to assault, a clear breach of university policy and a cross over to threatening behavior. As Kathy Adams Riester: “My best hope is that students understand that their right to freedom of speech, as well as everyone else’s and the ability to say and share what you’re thinking is really important,” continuing. “But it’s also important to practice respect to each other, and violence is never an answer when you disagree with speech. Really the answer is more speech” (The Daily Wildcat,