We have regularly discussed the rising attacks on free speech on college campuses, including Northwestern University. Protesters at Northwestern have blocked speakers while maintaining that there is “no free speech for overtly racist white dudes.” They have stopped classes from discussing ICE policies. However, the student government has now added an attack on the free press by voting to block media from meetings to protect students from criticism over their advocacy. Even the dean of the school’s prestigious journalism school called out the action as inimical to the free press.
The Daily Northwestern reported that the vote of the student government was unanimous in barring media from some meetings. It only pledged to supply “minutes to journalists for closed meetings, withholding the personal information of speakers.”
Student government member Assem Belhadj explained:
“This is about how to make sure student activism within ASG can be protected in a way that students can speak and have the freedom to dissent on issues without having this fear that what they say will be blown out of proportion and they will be publicly criticized.”
So these are government meetings but students do not want to be held accountable for what they may say or demand. What is striking is that Northwestern has been regularly criticized for its cancel culture where students seek to silence opposing views. Yet, in seeking government action, students do not want to be identified in seeking controversial measures.
Putting aside the denial of the rights of the free press, including the college newspaper, the move violates decades of sunshine laws premised on open government.
The Illinois Open Meetings Act embodies this policy, which presumes meetings will be open and “strictly” construes exceptions. The OMA states that “it is the intent of [the Illinois] Act to ensure that actions of public bodies be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.” 5 Ill. Comp. Stat. 120/1 (West 2005). The narrow exceptions deal with such subjects as disciplinary actions, collective negotiations, removals from office etc. It does not include a general closed meeting power.
Clearly, this is a private university and not subject to the OMA. However, Northwestern’s student government is now moving to insulate its student government from public scrutiny and accountability. It is a deeply troubling lesson for students who believe that government should be less transparent and advocates should be less accountable in seeking official changes. Moreover, even if you want to allow people to speak at meetings without identifying themselves, the meetings (and student representatives) should always be subject to media and public scrutiny.
The question is whether this is a matter left entirely to students at a university. We faced a similar question when student governments targeted individual students for unpopular viewpoints. The university should have its own policy on student government and open meetings. Just as student governments should have to operate consistently with regard to free speech, they should do so with regard to the free press.
- For the record, I hold a degree from Northwestern University.
I wish I could say it’s funny that Turley talks free speech, but says nothing when people can’t get into public town halls when republicans are talking.
Why do you assume that “Town Halls” convened by a candidate for public office are “public”? Public Meeting Sunshine Laws only apply when government business is conducted. Politicians meeting with their constituents is not government business.
They are “town” halls not “vapid narcissist” halls for a reason.
The student government takes lessons from Russian controlled media. Arrest the troublemakers. And send them to rehabilitation assimilation camps.
“. . . and they will be publicly criticized.”
Are their positions on a given topic that weak?
Or are they that weak, any criticism sends them to a safe space?
Turley asks, “ The question is whether this is a matter left entirely to students at a university.”
Yes, it’s a matter left entirely to students who PAID the university, a private university. The student government can choose its policies which ARE voted by members just as any other governmental body. A majority vote sets policy. Student governments are elected by students themselves. This is exactly what republicans argue all the time when supermajority state legislatures vote on controversial policy changes.
Liberty university has dome this for years and Turley seems strangely silent about it. Liberty university is also a private university and it has practiced censorship in journalism by the former university president jerry fallwell jr.
Even their student government has behaved just as badly,
https://www.whsv.com/2021/10/12/liberty-university-student-group-alleges-censorship-after-calls-reforms/
So you’re saying a student government policy can overrule a school policy?
Sergeant major,
“ So you’re saying a student government policy can overrule a school policy?”
What school policy says student government must be open to the press?
Students who are effectively the school’s “customers”, paying “customers”, elected their own governing body on their own. If they choose to add a policy to their list of policies regarding the conduct of THEIR elected body it’s entirely their prerogative.
The only ones complaining seem to be non-students or those not affiliated with the school.
Svelaz,
“What school policy says student government must be open to the press?”
I didn’t say there was one at this school but that’s what Turley suggested when he stated “The university should have its own policy on student government and open meetings.”
Your affirmative “Yes, it’s a matter left entirely to students…” in response to Turley’s question was ridiculous and you didn’t answer my question. Can student government policy overrule school policy? Obviously not because if that were the case then there’s no reason for the school to implement any policy if student government can simply ignore or overrule them.
Sergeant Major,
“ Your affirmative “Yes, it’s a matter left entirely to students…” in response to Turley’s question was ridiculous and you didn’t answer my question.”
Why would it be ridiculous? It’s a student government elected by students and run by elected students. It was a matter regarding student government functions so why wouldn’t it be a matter left entirely to students. These are paying university students. Student governments vary by school and size. Some are quite influential other are just advisory.
Since it’s obvious this school didn’t have a policy on accessibility of the press this student government could implement its own policy. This is a private school and it’s students are the ones paying them. Students thru their elected government chose a policy they agreed on. The vote was unanimous.
What right does a university administration have in interfering with student government if it’s not violating a policy or a lack of?
Svelez,
“Why would it be ridiculous?”
Because nothing is “a matter left entirely to students”, even elected ones. The school has every right to interfere with student government if they want to ensure they operate consistently with regard to free speech and free press.
I dunno. Deliberating in private is what juries do. It is what the Presidential cabinet does most of the time. People discussing things freely without the press or public around. Most of the work of Congress is done behind closed doors – once you get to public session it is really just a show for the press, a lot of posturing and a predetermined outcome. If you make these meetings all public then they will just meet privately before the meeting.
If you are concerned about what Northwestern students said about Jeff Sessions – you should hear what the Former Guy says about him now.
The cult is hardest on those who do not do everything the cult leader wants.
“The spread of communism starts when people are silenced. Free speech is the first freedom citizens lose.”
I was fortunate to have visited the DDR in the mid 1970s and passed through checkpoints Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie. Spent the whole day and part of an evening on the other side of the wall. It is an experience I will never forget. My travels also took me through Eastern Europe and the Mideast.
It would do these students well to visit places and learn the lessons where citizens are not afforded the precious gift of free speech. Where speaking freely is a punishable crime.
We may not agree on every point. Not a problem. We still can still remain respectful and kind toward one another.
If your arguments suck and will crumble under scrutiny censor the counterarguments.
Northwestern (and many others) should rename their journalism schools after Jerry Springer.
Who would have ever guessed that if you accepted a bunch of undeserving (on so many levels) kids into your uni, that your uni would become a laughingstock.
These people fighting racism are having the opposite effect, imo.
Hardly a surprise these days. Luckily I never went to Northwestern and none of my family did and I never paid any tuition for my children there. I did share a paper with Roy Patterson (in immunology) in 1979 and his group were excellent people but that was a long time ago. He would have probably have been aghast at this turn of events. I went to Emory University in Atlanta in the 1960’s and some parts were already getting insufferable but generally it was liberal and not progressive. I sent no children there either, because it grew too expensive and steadily more progressive (whatever that means now). 2 members of my family have 3 degrees from Purdue University, as good or better than Northwestern and far more middle of the road. Less expensive also. You can find superior value for education if you simply look harder and realize many Universities survive on their name and teach mainly trash.
Students need to quit school.
It appears the Northwestern students found (created) a loophole and are using it. Now the students have to start using it against them.
That’s pretty much just how the narcissist cry babies of the AOC generation do things, including AOC. Not a surprise. Why couldn’t we have had these conversations when they were still literally children and saw the warning signs? We are at a point now that it’ll all be very difficult to undo.
It is ironic that you say “Even the dean of the school’s prestigious journalism school called out the action as inimical to the free press.” as of that should be the last person to suggest that.
Isn’t it oxymoronic that Northwestern University (Chicago/Evanston, Ill. | Home of the Wildcats!)
is the Home of Medill School of Journalism, and “Reporting” is not being allowed [?].
For the record, I hold do not hold a degree from Northwestern University,
but worked there as a Custodian/Janitor for 2.5 years
to put my GF through Kendall Culinary School (Evanston, Ill.).
Also for the record, I do hold 3 degrees from the University of Toledo (Home of the Rockets!).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medill_School_of_Journalism
https://www.medill.northwestern.edu/
Fascists in Training
So much for the Sunshine law – – which brought backroom deals to an end. From nothing getting done we swing now to one-sided things getting done.
I suspect that every (any) University board meeting wouldn’t be open to the press?
Well lets be honest. THEY – vis a vis “the students” is a pretty broad cohort. In fact I suspect they skew more red these days than blue – the red pills are just in hiding. With that said they certainly create a credibility issue for themselves and now have shined a big ‘ole flashlight on their decisions and deliberations. I mean no one on student government surely will now move to LEAK anything to the press at all from those closed meetings or anything like that. Lol. Time to send in Project Veritas!
The Young Pioneers in action
Turley says:
“Just as many advocates hide behind anonymity in attacking professors or speakers, they now want anonymity in seeking officials actions and policies.”
I agree that contributors on this forum should not be able to attack others anonymously. People should prove their real identity and not hide behind a fake name. Accountability for one’s statements would go a long way in cleaning up this blog’s cesspool of hate.
I couldn’t agree more with you my friend!! I’ve been saying this for years!! I don’t believe that anyone should be able to get on the internet, by using a fake-ass-name. I say exactly, what I want to say. Furthermore, many times I cannot speak various-certain words I really want to use because of, suck-ass-censorship!! Which pisses me off to-no-end!!
That’s a good one, Svelaz. Gas, meet light.
James, unlike many others who post anonymously, conservative and liberal I’ve never had the need to post anonymously with the exception of the accidental premature posting.
Oh, and PS – I am aware that you did’t post with that moniker.
How can one verify your name is really jeffsilberman? I suspect there are those who don’t post their real names because they want to act like idiots but I also suspect a lot of people don’t post their name because they don’t want idiots showing up at their home or place of work because some idiot didn’t like what they wrote.
Sergeant Major,
There are ways to verify one’s authenticity. One’s address is not revealed. Even if one’s real name is known, there is still no accountability for being an idiot unless the individual is famous or infamous. It’s odd that there are no contributors on this blog who self-identify as an academic, law professor or distinguished lawyer.
Mostly Q-Anon followers, Trumpists and Fox, Newsmax and Infowar viewers. You can count the number of Liberals, Leftists and NeverTrumpers on 2 hands.
So when are you going to verify your name is jeffsilberman?
Did most contributors actually self-identity as “Q-Anon followers, Trumpists and Fox, Newsmax and Infowar viewers”?
Sergeant Major asks:
“Did most contributors actually self-identity as Q-Anon followers, Trumpists and Fox, Newsmax and Infowar viewers?”
Yes, when they repeat the Q-Anon, Trumpist, Fox News, Newsmax and Infowars’ Big Lie that the election was stolen.
jeffsilberman?
That’s not self-identifying and I doubt “most contributors” on here did what you imply.
So if an academic repeated something about the election being stolen would that cancel out the academic part of their self-identity?
And when are you going to verify your identity?
For someone who wants to “go a long way in cleaning up this blog’s cesspool of hate” you sure have strange way of doing so especially since you’re so quick to categorize other commenters you obviously dislike.
“So if an academic repeated something about the election being stolen would that cancel out the academic part of their self-identity?”
Absolutely. Only a liar or a dupe claims that the election was stolen. The academic Turley knows it was not.
jeffsilberman?
Remember when Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers declared it was “outrageous” to think his state’s 2020 election needed to be investigated. Now, two separate courts have concluded that state election regulators illegally changed rules, allowing tens of thousands to cast ballots in an unlawful manner.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled as many as 200,000 voters were allowed to illegally skip voter ID for absentee ballots by claiming they were indefinitely confined by COVID when there was no such legal authority to do so.
A Wisconsin judge has ruled the widespread use of ballot drop boxes in 2020; many of which were unsupervised, was unlawful and the state Supreme Court let that ruling stand.
In Wisconsin third-parties illegally collected the ballots of vulnerable residents at nursing homes, some of whom lacked the mental or physical capacity to vote or were forbidden from voting by guardianship agreements.
That’s just a few examples in Wisconsin and it wasn’t the only state to have issues. I’ll send you some more examples later.
“People should prove their real identity and not hide behind a fake name.” – jeffsilberman? says March 15, 2022 at 8:10 AM and has yet to verify his identity.
Turley nor does Bill Barr believe that there was massive fraud sufficient to overturn the election. Don’t waste your time. The Big Lie has wrecked the careers of Trumpist lawyers, subjected hundreds to criminal prosecution for storming the Capitol and has divided the Republican Party between the lying Trumpists and those who will not go along with this fabrication.
Hi Sergeant Major,
Thank you for your service, I don’t know what flavor of green that you are but It doesn’t matter. Semper Fi my friend.