There is a disturbing story how this week concerning the U.S. Civil Rights Commission and specifically Commissioner Michael Yaki, a Democratic appointee who was a former senior adviser to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Yaki spoke on sexual harassment law in education, a subject on which I have previously written to express my concerns over the loss of due process rights for accused students. Yaki’s comments however seem to threaten core free speech principles as he laid out his view of the need to curtail harmful speech. Yaki spoke of the need to outlaw unpopular or what he considers degrading speech because college students are too impressionable.
He highlighted the types of speech that he want banned as including certain types of fraternity or parody displays considered offensive. He also included pageants as possible speech crimes due to the dangers inherent in “a situation involving women” in which they “parade around in skimpy clothing and turn in some show or something.”
He then added: “I mean where do you think you can, that the university can’t deal with ensuring the route it has environment that is not oppressive or hostile because obviously a campus, especially certain types of campuses where there’s a lot of — where — that are geographically compact, that have a lot of working and living situations in a close area to create a campus atmosphere . . . Doesn’t that gravitate toward having greater ability to proscribe certain types of conduct that have the ability to escalate beyond what anyone would consider to be reasonable or acceptable?”
Whatever that may mean, Yaki then made the most dangerous turn of his comments in suggesting that speech limitations are appropriate on college campuses under the same theory as applied to elementary students: “It has to do with science. More and more, the vast majority, in fact — I think — overall in bodies of science is that young people, not just K through 12 but also between the ages of 16 to 20, 21 is where the brain is still in a stage of development.” Yaki’s distinction between “the juvenile or adolescent or young adult brain processes information” and “adult brains” would allow for sweeping speech limitations. He simply declared that even college brains are “vastly different from the way that we adults do.” He added that “when we sit back and talk about what is right or wrong in terms of First Amendment jurisprudence from a reasonable person’s standpoint, we are really not looking into the same referential viewpoint.” This distinction, he argued, offers “very good and compelling reasons why broader policies and prohibitions on conduct in activities and in some instances speech are acceptable on a college campus level that might not be acceptable say in an adult work environment or in an adult situation.”
We have seen in recent years increasing demands for the curtailment of speech as hate crimes or forms of discrimination. We have even seen professors engage in alleged crimes to stop speech on subjects like abortion. While Republicans were once criticized in the 1960s as hostile to campus speech, it now appears that Democrats are more often demanding the criminalization or the banning of different forms of speech. The suggestion that college brains are undeveloped and requiring protection from bad speech is truly unnerving.
Source: Yahoo. Eugene Volokh first reported on these statements by Yaki.
Also, if you read Yaki’s remarks, you have to ask yourself, how can a person so incoherent be on the US Civil Rights Commission? He doesn’t sound capable of uttering a well-constructed sentence.
If the brains of 20 year olds are ‘undeveloped’, should they have the vote? If they aren’t mature enough to be exposed to the full spectrum of debate, how can we expect them to make mature electoral choices?
Where the hell have you been, Turley? This speech code crap has been going on for years and you’re just now noticing? Shameful.
Ridiculous.
I think the Left is worse about it because sooo much of what they struggle for is symbolic in nature. The FIRST gay football player just sends them into a tingly fit. So verbalizing a disagreement with them is hitting them right in the guts.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
zarathustraSmiles, that would the mother of all bad ideas; thanks just the same.
slohrrs, While I agree ideologues on the left and right are dangerous to our Constitution, it is the left that have focused on speech control. They control the education industry and they are indoctrinating young people. The left is focused on limiting both the First and Second Amendments, the right the Fourth. Ironically however, the very conservative Scalia is strong on the 4th.
nick, I see that you do not know US history at all. The rightwing had control over all things you mentioned until recently.
More social engineering from the audacious left crowd. They pick and choose their science about the same as the Faux-news crowd. Pick your poison.
Yaki’s brain is still in a stage of development.
Pelosi does like to appoint people even more stupid than she.
For some, academic justice trumps academic freedom:
http://www.thecrimson.com/column/the-red-line/article/2014/2/18/academic-freedom-justice/?page=single
These attacks on the First Amendment are more about power than about political correctness.
Once you have the power to limit certain speech, you have the power to control dialogue and attack enemies.
Perhaps more importantly, you have become a very powerful person.
What a shame….. that someone SMART, like John Oliver, isn’t running the planet…
It is quite clear from the gibberish that was in the third paragraph, that his brain is totally undeveloped. So he may have a point in protecting US from his speech. We certainly do not need people like him enforcing any kind of speech limitations.
“U.S. Civil Rights Commission” and “Speech Limitations” – this guy really puts the moron into oxymoron. If we ever needed a limit on speech it would be on those advocating a limit on speech.
He’s right in that brains of college age kids aren’t fully developed. Let’s hope not anyway. But why pick on college kids? There are lots of kids the same age who aren’t in college. Is he going after their speech and activities as well? It’s all bunk. Maybe his brain is still developing or maybe it stopped developing too soon.
“Yaki spoke of the need to outlaw unpopular or what he considers degrading speech because college students are too impressionable.” – JT
Sounds like an arbitrary civility rule based on what should and should not be officially acceptable … something that is degree based no doubt.
There is a struggle to limit speech that is “fear inducing” even as we daily grow fearful of more and more issues (If CSPAN is Not Afraid to Listen, Why is Anyone Afraid to Listen?). It is replacing apple pie.
scary stuff considering this loons position.
progressives are nuts.
PC is pernicious and must be stopped by any means necessary. Madison and the Bay Area, Pelosi’s dominion, are the mother ships of this Constitutional threat. http://www.thefire.org is a great website for keeping up on this terrorist plot.
Rafflaw, I would love your take on this. A couple weeks ago you scoffed that liberal universities were controlling speech, trying to thwart the First Amendment. Maybe this idiot, Yaki, should consult w/ Putin on how to control speech. He is KGB, that was one of their specialties. And while he’s @ it, maybe he could get the name of a good barber.
Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
This is as bad as it gets the First Amendment is all but gone! When we are afraid to talk and express our self’s the Republic in gone — what will arise from the ashes is yet to be determined — but its unlikely to be any good!