In my book, “The Indispensable Right, I explore how vandalism and aggressive campus protests should not be treated as free speech but as proscribed conduct. College Fix has another example of this distinction today when a person trashed a Turning Point table on the campus of UC Berkeley.
The posting shows a possible student pouring tomato juice over the group’s fliers and posters. The display promoted an event with Chloe Cole and Harrison Tinsley, who are critics of gender transitioning.
The activist responds to objections from the volunteers by saying “Are you worried I’m going to stain your f**king signs as you lie to people, aw so sorry. I f**king tried to talk to you a**holes. Enjoy getting this stain out.”
Likewise, anti-Israeli protesters at the University of Minnesota occupied and reportedly trashed a university building. None of these acts are protected as free speech. They are conduct that violate either university rules or criminal law or both.
Much like shouting down speakers, these are actions that silence others or damage property. Trashing displays or silencing others is the antithesis of free speech.
Yet, universities often fail to take meaningful action against such actors.
At the University of California Santa Barbara, professors actually rallied around feminist studies associate professor Mireille Miller-Young, who physically assaulted pro-life advocates and tore down their display. Despite pleading guilty to criminal assault, she was not fired and received overwhelming support from the students and faculty. She was later honored as a model for women advocates.
At Hunter College in New York, Professor Shellyne Rodríguez was shown trashing a pro-life display of students.
She was captured on a videotape telling the students that “you’re not educating s–t […] This is f–king propaganda. What are you going to do, like, anti-trans next? This is bulls–t. This is violent. You’re triggering my students.”
Unlike the professor, the students remained calm and respectful. One even said “sorry” to the accusation that being pro-life was triggering for her students.
Rodríguez continued to rave, stating, “No you’re not — because you can’t even have a f–king baby. So you don’t even know what that is. Get this s–t the f–k out of here.” In an Instagram post, she is then shown trashing the table.
Hunter College, however, did not consider this unhinged attack to be sufficient to terminate Rodríguez.
It was only after she later chased reporters with a machete that the college fired Rodríguez. She was then hired by another college.
What is most striking about this video is the license that the activist claims in trashing the display in stating “I f**king tried to talk to you a**holes.” The notion is that, if you tell people with opposing views that they are wrong, you are then justified to take violent action. It is the license of rage and this video shows how many today do not like to admit that they like the rage. It is addictive. It gives you this sense of license to say and do things that you would not ordinarily say or do.
This activist has every right to protest this event at Berkeley. However, trashing a display is a criminal act that should be punished by the university if this is a student. It should also be pursued by police to deter such conduct in the future. Free speech is enhanced, not curtailed, when such conduct is barred on our campuses.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Pretty obvious these “students” (and I use the term lightly) are not even intelligent enough to express themselves without resorting to profanity. That’s what happens when you have no facts and not logical arguments. You resort to profanity. I take NO ONE seriously when they talk like that.
The right’s been using strategic obnoxiousness to get their rhetoric out forever. They sure don’t like it when it comes back at them. Party on. Free speech vs. Free speech. Make some right wing snow flakes sweat a bit.
Oh sure, it’s that simple .. it’s a real neaner neaner strategy while people perish.
Pathetic attempt at logic.
The right’s been using strategic obnoxiousness to get their rhetoric out forever.
Commie strategic obnoxiousness defined: “How DARE you disagree with us or point out our lies – it hurts our feelings when you do that!”
This young commie is apparently too young to remember the long list of Republicans their earlier commie leaders have said “he’s LITERALLY Hitler!”
Nixon
Ford
Reagan
Bush Mk 1
Bush Mk 2
McCain
Romney
DeSantis
And now of course, Trump and Vance.
Turley loves to cherry-pick certain incidents and blow them out of proportion for the express purpose of spurring ire and rage among his readers. That’s just a basic fact.
One constant theme among the right and Turley is the want and need to met out harsh punishment for benign acts of harassment. Shoving a bunch of papers off a table or knocking down a sign is not assault. Screaming and Yelling at someone who they do not agree with is protected speech. Now, that’s not to say the actions of occupying a building and barricading themselves are free speech or acceptable. Despite the obvious vandalism and ransacking, it’s still a protest. Legal or not the students know it is against the rules and the law. Turley has this quaint notion that protests and disagreements should be held most politely and civilly and seems to imply that anything other than that should be met with severe punishment. The problem is our history is littered with examples of exercising free speech by being disruptive, violent, acting in disobedience to authority, etc and we celebrate it as an inherent American thing to do.
Protests ARE meant to be disruptive, loud, obnoxious, jarring, confrontational, and yes, even sometimes violent like Jan 6. Of course, there should be consequences and of course, there should be punishment. Nobody says there shouldn’t be. But Turley complains Universities don’t punish those who simply swipe papers off a table knock down a sign or pour tomato juice on a display. That type of conduct is not severe enough to elicit the kind of punishment Turley and others want. Severe punishment.
It’s not just the left that does this kind of protest. The right does it too. When the Satanic Temple put up displays next to nativity scenes at capitol buildings they were constantly vandalized by the right. Turley of course will never mention incidents involving the right because that is not the purpose of his blog. This is about getting those on the right riled up about “despicable” things that randomly happen involving the left and giving the impression that it happens all the time. Feeding the rage.
Turley’s wrong about one thing though. Rage is also protected speech. It’s an expression of an emotion of anger and frustration. Last time I heard expression is also a form of speech just like decorating a cake. Rage IS protected speech just like expressing anger. The conduct associated with that may be a bit out of bounds for some. But it’s also not illegal or a crime. Turley wants us to believe that only civil, polite speech and conduct that HE or those on the right determine is the only protected form of speech is the only correct form that is allowed. He’s wrong. Shouting down speakers is not anti-free speech. It is not a violation of a speaker’s First Amendment rights. The First Amendment only protects against government infringement. Not from private individuals. It’s the speaker’s choice to either stand their ground or be shut down by overwhelming heckling and shouting from multiple private individuals. It’s not unconstitutional and it’s not a violation of an individual’s rights. It’s purely an individual choice to continue speaking against shouting individuals or strategically retreat for another day. Heckling and shouting down someone is also an exercise of free speech. The only difference is that it is rude and inconsiderate. Nothing in the constitution or law says speech must be polite and civil to be protected.
TLDR
Svelaz often opens with this whine…
“purpose of spurring ire and rage among his readers”
And closes with this cheese…
“Rage IS protected speech just like expressing anger.”
He never stops to ask himself if ANYONE gives a flying turd about his opinion.
Instead, he constantly opines about his definition of what is acceptable speech and what is not.
Congress shall make no law. Period. It doesn’t need to be explained by some dunce who doesn’t know the difference between “speech” and speaking, or the difference between “speech” and conduct.
Divulging classified information is not “speech”. If it were, the could be NO LAWS against it.
Lying under oath is not “speech”. If it were, there could be NO LAWS against it.
Breaking into a building, camping out on the quad, throwing firecrackers at police, burning a gov’t owned flag, cornering someone in a building, intimidating someone on campus, standing in someones path to hinder their free movement, spitting on police, shouting fire in a movie theater when there is none, bringing a bullhorn into the Senate and shouting such that the recognized speaker cannot be heard ( for which no amount of “not backing down”, is a remedy, you imbecile), are NOT SPEECH. They are conduct.
You cannot intelligently discuss “free speech” until you learn these basic facts.
Shall I look up the time you called tresspassing “free speech” and violently resisting arrest “civil disobedience”, and post it here, Svelaz?
Turley loves to cherry-pick certain incidents and blow them out of proportion for the express purpose of spurring ire and rage among his readers. That’s just a basic fact.
A basic fact. Curious George cannot explain why he obsessively comes here despite his obvious hatred of Professor Turley, to unleash his Trump Derangement Syndrome and lies as though this were his personal blog rather him here as a guestllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.
Is it because Curious George doesn’t want to spend any of his welfare money paying for a Wordsmith blog page?
Protests ARE meant to be disruptive, loud, obnoxious, jarring, confrontational, and yes, even sometimes violent like Jan 6.
Another Curious George lie. If that were so, there would be no point to having laws regarding rioting, causing a disturbance, vandalism, being a public nuisance, etc.
The Election Season Of Mostly Peaceful Rioting, Pillaging, Looting And Burning prior to January 6th wasn’t protected legal free speech. The fact that George didn’t get arrested while he was torching cars, firing shots at police officers, burning court houses and police stations doesn’t mean it was legal. It just means those jurisdictions had elected governments and governors like Tim Walz who thought it was cool for rioters to destroy other peoples’ property.
The reason the Soviet Democrats street thugs and barbarians didn’t riot, pillage, loot and burn here in Montana and next door in Idaho and Wyoming wasn’t because they were being polite.
It was because they knew the rule of FAFO was happily endorsed by the citizenry.
Not much future in betting your life in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho that you can destroy and loot peoples’ property and be bullet proof while doing so.
Pity other states and the Federal government have decided to allow this political violence because…. well…. like Curious George: BBBUUUTTTT… MUH TRUMP!!!
“Turley loves to [blah, blah, blah].”
You could’ve saved yourself a lot of effort by just writing:
It’s my vandal. And I approve.
That’s not a woman, btw, it’s obviously a man. Check out the sideburns & stubble. When biological males (XY) get estrogen it seems to form a witches’ brew with their onboard testosterone (and maybe brain structure) to create the worst of both genders. The sensitivity of a woman plus the aggression of a man. Not a healthy mix for them, or for the rest of us. You will find, if you look, that very few people transitioning the other way (XX to male) have this problem. Someone should study it.
The vandal is on video. I hope as much effort is expended to identify him/her and punish him/her as was expended in finding the J6 people.
* CD, conduct disorder.
Professor, going back to Randall Kennedy thinking an invitation is speech is another example of conduct disorder. It’s anti-social behavior. For Kennedy an invitation can be withdrawn and a person can be insulted seeing no distinctions in social conduct.
It’s all expression now and let’s move to Maxine Waters and the anti-social behavior of “get in their faces and say you’re not wanted here”. The machete was an expression of the lady’s great anger.
I’m not a psychiatrist. Yes, conduct is a real thing. I’m not going to psychoanalyze this but the “left” sees non acceptance of transgenders and the table was an insult.
There was property damage. When property is damaged it’s a red flag that it could escalate into human damage. Transgender do self mutilate as do others with implants of all kinds. Systemic illness and preoccupation with the body.
Red symbolizes blood. Normally red paint is used.
Colleges are unsafe being supervised by the likes of Kennedy and others.
* tag, envy. Covet. Those who envy will destroy what others have distinguishing it from jealously. The emphasis is destruction of what another has.
* Children are being harmed. The innocence and safety of children is being harmed. Extend it to the female mother. How can we really hurt her. Harm her child. What can an actual woman do? Have children.
It needs to be stopped now.
It turns out that the only person having more secret conversations with Putin than Trump, is Elon Musk.
Apparently, Vladimir Putin is really the richest man on earth.
He even owns Elon Musk.
Poor Baby. So upset because Musk supports Trump. The Musk- Putin story has as much credibility as the first Russia Hoax the left fantasized.
“Yet, universities often fail to take meaningful action against such actors.”
+++
And yet they worry about falling enrollment.
I admit that I would have enjoyed watching this idiot get clobbered, was waiting for it, but, alas, it didn’t happen. They do this crap because there are no consequences.
* Enrollment falling due to danger. The object of envy is to be destroyed. Have colleges been destroyed? They didn’t envy the education. They envied YOUR education.
By damn this is my corner, I’ll run you off again if you show up touting whatever, go peacefully or I’ll show no mercy. That’s the ignorance of the left. Regarding vandalism, the Supreme Court ruled this year that Unions or employees have no protected liability when they damage property while on their own time.
If you click on the “View all 733 comments” at the bottom of Professor Turley’s Instagram attachment, you can watch the entire video clip without signing in. Just think, it’s students like this who could be controlling your children’s future!
JT cherry picks a few instances of people on the right being harassed. Meanwhile, actual right leaning governments are taking away the rights of citizens Book bans, women’s health bans. All happening at the behest of government, not individuals, and JT is silent.
JT, your credibility is gone.
JT cherry picks a few instances of people on the right being harassed
Complete and total BS. He has cited and written about thousands of examples over the years. They just don’t occur the other way around in appreciable numbers. Since you can’t handle the truth, I suggest you call a waaaaambulance.
“woman’s health bans” Code words for unrestricted, government paid-for abortions. The dishonesty runs deep. And “book bans” are not being done by conservatives, unless reference is made being made, as usual, to the decisions that public schools make as to books which they buy and use in the class room or put in their libraries. What you buy is not a limit on what other people or organizations buy.
So says the “Anonymous” person (I guess it’s a person). Anonymous comments are worthless especially when not based on any facts.
* The best part was the fellow at the end, behold the tolerant left.
Wasteful. Tomato juice makes fine bloody Mary’s…
I see it as immature individuals still searching for self-identity and purpose. They latch on to issues they glean through media, then seek attention and visibility by attempting to stand out in a crowd with unorthodox or other differentiating conduct. What they fail to appreciate is that the attention they receive only showcases their immaturity and foolish (yes, potentially criminal) behavior. I am convinced that the disgusting conduct of immature “professor Rodriguez” was triggered not so much by her personal views but by the notion that certain students might see her as a modern-day idol/hero.
Lin is correct. Lin is identifying what is obvious to most of us when we observe criminal behavior in lieu of civil conduct. Notice the vulgarity of the student. This is behavior that is meant to injure or to protect an individual with low abilities insofar as they are unable to comport themselves to civility. this is hallmark conduction criminal law. They often resort to unlawful behavior because they lack the repository of skills to engage in civil behavior. And the great experiment continues. When students, many of them impressionable lumps of clay coming out of high school, are confronted with perspectives they do not understand, they the engage in defensive behavior. If this behavior escalates into unlawful behavior the university has an obligation to limit their conduct in what ever way necessary to correct their behavior towards conduct that is consistent with civil conduct. Turley and so many others who have been commenting on this for so long now, is correct in that the university that permits this conduct is being inconsiderate of the goal of literacy and that is to promote civility. This is not a military arm of the government. These children are not being trained in coercive diplomacy. They are being exposed to the fact of their own illiteracy and some of the “kids” don’t respond very well to this fact. Lin is correct in that the vanity supporting conduct which brings attention to the overt actor evidences an underdeveloped child. The university has an obligation, along with the parents who supplied the university with this person, to correct the behavior at its inception so the underdeveloped can learn about the discipline necessary for civil behavior. Phobic responses to the unknown are just more pronounced some individuals. The try to convert the situation to their own construct which is usually what is carried over from lower level experiences like high school. Lin is correct. These actors are immature. We need to support the university in performing their responsibility to not only correct maladaptive behavior but also to reinforce the benefits of civility. Then the underdeveloped can learn about constructs like speech and the need to entertain ideas which may make one a bit uncomfortable but are nonetheless perspectives which exist in this world. Once the take this first step they can then understand the logical correlate of speech and that is the right to listen and to hear the ideas of others. This concept is is being identified and shared with the public by informed members like Case Sustein of Harvard and Eugene Voloch of Stanford. These are very real logical extensions of the right of expression and they are rights that are obviously unknown to vain, insecure and uninformed tomato juice throwers.
Sorry about the hallmark conduction in criminal law. Word correct and failure to proof.
Well isnt that charming.
And still…colleges can’t understand why enrollment is tanking. They need to start taking notes.
Dear Mr. Turley, I am not sure why on earth the Left does not see how they are in violation of the people’s right to free speech and the right of assembly. I would suggest the Left move to North Korea. See how it would be living there with no human rights.
College students face zero accountability for despicable acts like these from their respective universities which in turn, encourages more temper tantrums like this one. I would encourage the liberal use of Belgian water cannons on these little “protestors” Jonathan. They could probably use a shower anyway….
The intolerant, hateful Left. Always the haters on the Left.
As long as they’re allowed to get away with this it will just continue. I have never seen someone so badly in need of a good old fashioned tuneup.
A knuckle sandwich solves many problems.
soup and sandwich
Perhaps, A blanket party
Deportations are all well and good, but we need to start talking about expulsion, exile, and banishment.
cionnath: agree, and only add: prevention is always superior to remediation/damage control.
But then their parents would have to be parents and not friends. I do not know whether that can happen these days.
Time to END Federal Aid to colleges….cities, states, non-profits
let democrats fund their own failure
also ban public unions or at least any political activity!
What an odd creature with the tomato juice
You are so right. The left’s success in their mission to eradicate God and replace Him with a worship of Self is accomplishing what no foreign enemy could.
We are well along the path of destroying ourselves.
Respectfully disagree badger re the destroying ourselves comment. Where I live this creature is beaten to death and fed to alligators. I live in America. Where do you live?
Also odd without the juice.