Table of Contents
After Lawsuit, Eastern Michigan U. Agrees to Revise Unconstitutional Policy
In March, student organization Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS for Life at Eastern Michigan University (EMU) enlisted Alliance Defending Freedomās (ADFās) help in after it denied the group funding based on its āpolitical or ideologicalā views. ADF announced yesterday that EMU settled the case late last month, to fund all groupsāincluding Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS for Lifeāwithout consideration of the groupsā viewpoints.
ADF the lawsuitās origins on its website:
In February, Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS for Life at Eastern Michigan University applied for student fee funding to host a pro-life display on campus called the Genocide Awareness Project, a traveling photo-mural exhibit... . EMU denied the request because they deemed the photos of the aborted babies and the event as too controversial, biased, and one-sided.
As ADF notes in its , EMU policy āprohibit[s] student fee funding for āpolitical or ideologicalā activities of student organizations.ā According to the complaint, this policy was created in response to the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuitās decision in , which the school interpreted as prohibiting the use of mandatory student activity fees for āpolitical or ideological activities.ā But in Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin v. Southworth (2000), the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Seventh Circuitās ruling and held that ā[t]he First Amendment permits a public university to charge its students an activity fee used to fund a program to facilitate extracurricular student speech,provided that the program is viewpoint neutralā (emphasis added).
This clash between EMUās policy and the First Amendment was exacerbated by the fact that the policy was selectively :
EMU officials had been inconsistent with their funding guidelines and had allocated the same funds to political and ideological speech discussing āwelfare rights, womenās and abortion rights, religion, student activist training, and race-conscious causes, just to name a few.ā
In initially denying Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS for Life funding, EMU plainly violated the groupās right to freedom of speech by discriminating against these students based on their viewpoint.
EMUās recent promise to fund Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS for Lifeās event despite its controversial nature is important not only to comply with the requirements of the First Amendment but also to further the purpose of the university. In Healy v. James (1972), the Supreme Court called the American college campus a āmarketplace of ideas.ā In , the Court explained how viewpoint-neutral disbursement of mandatory student activity fees universities contributes to that marketplace: colleges use student activity fees to āenhance the educational experience of its students by ... stimulating advocacy and debate on diverse points of view.ā
This outcome marks a significant and necessary change to protect EMU studentsā rights to freely express themselves on a wide range of topics, and we applaud this result.
Image: Bruce T. Halle Library at Eastern Michigan University -
Recent Articles
Get the latest free speech news and analysis from Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS.
LAWSUIT: Ex-cop sues after spending 37 days in jail for sharing meme following Charlie Kirk murder
āLet them sueā: Iowa lawmakers scoffed at First Amendment in wake of Charlie Kirk shooting, records show
City Club of Cleveland rejects illiberal calls to disinvite speaker