“[d]iscussions about the number of genders has [sic] been determined to meet our definition of political content. Thus, per current campus policies this event cannot take place in outdoor or other public spaces (including tabling locations). If you would like to shift your event to a classroom or other private location, I’m happy to facilitate finding you a new location.”
The group indicated that it would file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. It cited President Donald Trump’s executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” That order requires federally funded institutions to “respect the rights of students to assert the binary nature of sex.”
The status of the school as a private institution is likely to be cited as a protection against any effort to compel greater diversity of thought and free speech.
Pundits and politicians, including former presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, have justified their calls for censorship (or “content moderation” for polite company) by stressing that the First Amendment only applies to the government, not private companies. That distinction allows Obama to declare himself to be “pretty close to a First Amendment absolutist.” He did not call himself a “free speech absolutist” because he favors censorship for views that he considers to be “lies,” “disinformation,” or “quackery.”
The distinction has always been a disingenuous evasion. The First Amendment is not the sole or exclusive definition of free speech. Censorship on social media is equally, if not more, damaging for free speech. Those who value free speech should oppose blacklisting systems, as was the case during the McCarthy period. Now that conservatives and libertarians are being blacklisted, it is suddenly less troubling for many on the left.
The same is true for private universities. Even if discrimination laws did not apply directly to universities, they would still be discriminatory and wrong in using race or religion or gender to bar individuals from admissions or appointments. Free speech is no different. It is not only a core human right, but a vital component to the mission of higher education.
Embry-Riddle is dead wrong in this reported ban of public debates over gender identity. It should immediately reverse this ill-considered, heavy-handed policy.
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.”