
The decision in Young America’s Foundation v. Napolitano is critical to forcing schools like Berkeley to deal with the rising anti-free speech movement in the United States — the subject of my lecture this week at Carnegie Mellon University. Having said that, this is a denial of a motion to dismiss where the facts are assumed in favor of the non-moving party, the YAF. Thus, the case must still be proven.
Nevertheless, the “unbridled discretion” afforded under the policies are a matter of concern given their use to effectively bar conservative speakers. It is hard to look at the history of Berkeley and not conclude that this is content-based regulation (and denial) of speech. Indeed, Berkeley and other schools like DePaul University have used the mob to justify cancelling speakers. That institutionalizes the “Heckler’s Veto” so that a mob need only threaten violence and the school then cancels the speech . . . which is what the mob was demanding.
Here is the opinion: Berkeley opinion
