Yesterday, I flagged the decision of New York University’s School of Law to cancel the planned Federalist Society event featuring conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro. It is only the latest example of schools scuttling or limiting speeches by conservatives and libertarians, citing the likely protests on campus. Instead of punishing those who disrupt events, NYU and other schools enable those protesters and reinforce the ideological orthodoxy in higher education.Eventually, Associate Dean Megan McDermott simply canceled the event, writing:
“After a review of the already great demands on resources and personnel (including but certainly not limited to security personnel) during the week of October 6-10, 2025, I personally made the decision that we could not host your event on campus during that week…This is not a decision based on the proposed program or speaker but rather based on an obligation to provide enhanced security generally on campus during that week as well as resource commitments we have already made across multiple buildings for public and closed events during the same period.”
However, while Shapiro’s one-hour speech is canceled, other events will continue as planned that same day, including discussions on how to reinforce the “DEI social agenda.” Many conservatives opposed that agenda, but they are not viewed as potentially disruptive.
The Federalist Society has organized an alternative event where free speech can be exercised outside of the NYU campus.
Shapiro has been the subject of prior cancel campaigns.
In the meantime, radical left faculty and figures routinely appear on campuses without interruption or added demands from administrators. Schools routinely allow for a type of “heckler’s veto” at such events in closing down speeches. In this case, they did so preemptively, citing the anticipated protests as the basis for the action. Other schools have employed the same tactic in blocking conservative speakers. It is the same rationale cited by some private groups in excluding certain participants over anticipated protests.
The solution is obvious. NYU must stand firm in protecting free speech rights on campus. If students or faculty enter events to shout down or disrupt the speakers, they should be suspended or fired. Campus police should work with local police to facilitate the arrest of trespassers and violent protesters. What they cannot do is yield to these protesters, punishing those who wish to speak or to listen to opposing views.
In the past, universities have been quick to use such rationales to close down conservative speakers. It is a passive-aggressive position where they simply throw up their hands and say that expected protesters forced them to take the action. Administrators are often neither motivated nor empathetic toward those raising opposing views. In this case, they would not allow a one-hour speech by a speaker on the anniversary of a massacre.
This decision should be condemned by faculty and alumni regardless of how they feel about Shapiro or Israel. NYU had a clear choice here: They could stand with free speech or yield to those opposed to its exercise on campus. Their decision to cancel the originally scheduled event is a disgraceful surrender to voices of intolerance and orthodoxy. They failed the most fundamental test of higher education in defending intellectual diversity and free speech.
Once again, it is the mob that prevailed in dictating what can be discussed on campus as Administrators stand in silent acquiescence.
NYC Mayor candidate Curtis Sliwa would invite NYU Penelope Fernandes to ride the NYC subways with him, but Penelope will decline due to security reasons.
Agreed. These are the same moron academics and management that would allow 5 year-olds to run rampant in other peoples homes using a crayon on their walls and call it artistic expression. American universities are dumps and wastelands of for woke behavior! The best is the courts seem to think it is an ideal that needs protecting – Jack ass jurists sprouting like mushrooms!
Q. for Linda McMahon” do any Federal funds flow to NYU? If so, please explain why, and cut off same immediately.
Only to be over ridden by another lib judge.. As we have seen before
Of course they do – there are less than half a dozen colleges in the US that do not accept govenrment funds.
The first amendment only applies to colleges accepting government funds.
But that is 99.9999% of all colleges.
$732 million last year.
As usual Turley is completely disingenuous and duplicitous.
He is simply shoveling chum to the Mindless MAGA Mob.
The speech is not cancelled.
It is simply moved to another date and to a location that can be more easily secured for the explicitly stated purpose of minimizing protests.
If any free speech is being denied or curtailed, it is the speech of potential protesters, NOT the speech of Shapiro.
“He is simply shoveling chum”
Not true, but even if it was, that chum would be far superior to the smegma scrapings that you attempt to peddle here…
In Turley’s own words, “Fernandes also pushed to hold the event in a basement space to further protect against protesters”
Why is he NOT attacking NYU for attempting to limit and curtail the free speech rights of potential protesters to make their voices heard ????
This is the ONLY free speech issue here, and Turley is deliberately avoiding it, and distorting the situation to suit his own prejudices, and those of the Mindless MAGA Mob.
Have you been under a rock? The only people whose “free speech rights” are not limited and curtailed are the protestors to whom you refer.
It is worse than you are saying.
NYU is not claiming that there are groups that have scheduled protests, only that they expect protests.
NYU can not stop protests scheduled by campus groups.
It CAN stop people randomly showing up to protest.
You are correct that other campus groups that wish to protest on Oct 7. Either protesting the Fed Soc event or just the who Oct 7th thing are free to do so – under the same constraints as the Fed Soc.
All campus groups have equal access to campus public forums on a first come first served basis.
BUT they MUST schedule their event – they can not be denied by the college. But anyone showing up unscheduled can be removed from campus.
When the Uni uses “security concerns” as a reason to change locales what do you think they mean by that? They mean that protestors don’t protest, they use violent means to shut down events.
Holy shet, anon, you just might be the dumbest poster right here, right now. Apparently you don’t know how to read. Because you obviously missed the next part where it stated that NYU’s Associate Dean Megan McDermott simply canceled the event altogether. 🤦♂️
Professor Turley and whomever moderate (Darrin, I think that’s your name; sorry, if I’m misremembering your name), may I recommend in switching forums to another free forum service such as ProBoards.
https://www.proboards.com/
Or better yet, Asgaros (https://asgaros.com/) as it does allow a forum’s owner’s WordPress blog to be integrated.
I do believe you, Professor Turley, can have your moderator integrate a better functioning forum into your WordPress blog. It will most certainly cut back on miscreants, like the one above, who doesn’t argue in good faith. And I think that’ll be a good thing. 😊
It’s being moved solely because they don’t want to throw communists and jihadists in jail. They would have no problem with throwing rightwing disruptors in jail. How do I know? Because that’s exactly what you would handle it.
People like you have made it quite clear that they despise due process and equal protections for anybody but themselves and their illegals.
And the next proposed date might get cancelled, too. They might be just kicking the can down the road to stay off Trump’s radar–another tactic you would approve of.
“free speech rights of potential protesters”
If there is no speech , what will these potential protesters be protesting against?
But there will be a speech, so your comment is stupid and pointless.
If, if, if is not an argument, it is a deflection.
Your comment is about as relevant as saying, “If pig’s could fly, we would all be covered in pig sh!t.”
If, if, if they actually hold the event at a new date. Don’t hold your breath.
You, yourself, are hoping they’ll cancel it, again. Nobody believes people like you anymore. If you want to complain about that, complain to all the people on your side who lied about so much over that last five years.
Again with the “IF” arguments.
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that saying “IF” and setting up a straw man is not an argument???
Oh, I know the answer !!!!
It is simply the primitive reflexes of a mindless MAGA cult member incapable of rational thought processes.
Nobody believes people like you anymore. Nobody believes your promises. Nobody believes your lies. Read the room, they/them.
“Nobody believes you” is not an argument or a rebuttal.
It is simply an admission that you know I am right, and you have nothing cogent or rational to say in response.
Again I congratulate you on proving the mindless nature of the MAGA mob.
I’m not rebutting you. I’m calling you out. The voters rebutted you in the last election.
“I am not rebutting you” you say.
That is EXACTLY my point.
You know I am right and you are UNABLE to rebut me, so you meander off into the void with completely irrelevant, irrational, and pointless deflection and obfuscation.
This is the standard response of the Mindless MAGA Mob.
Thank you once again for proving my point.
You lie, and when the lies don’t work anymore, you just kill the guy. Why would any sane person “debate” with murderers and ghouls?? You don’t want to debate. You just came here to troll.
Again with the obfuscation and deflection.
What have I personally lied about ??
Who have I personally killed ??
You are the one who reuses to debate.
As I said above, you know I am right, you refuse to debate or try to rebut me, so you simply set up another straw man to attack in a perfect display of deflection that is the standard response of the Mindless MAGA mob.
Congratulations once again for proving my point.
No ATS
You are being rejected as a proven liar whose arguments are not worthy or paying attention to.
Rebutting you is easy – I and others do it quite well constantly
But eventually it is pointless.
You have zero credibility.
You did that to yourself.
It is not necessary to “rebut” you.
it is simpler just to ignore you.
This case is simple – NYU violated the first amendment rights of NYU Fed Soc students. PERIOD
You and other left wing nuts keep trying to make excuses.
We have spent the better part of two milenia working out the rules of free speech.
The brightest people of several milenia have addressed this, and then we have used trial and error to test modify and improve their approachs.
Left wing nuts CONSTANTLY presume the planet was born yesterday – that we should remember nothing of the past except white people colonizing and enslaving others.
But the FACT is incomprehensibly large amounts of thought and effort have brought us where we are today, and the odds of some left wing nut ding bat coming up with a better way are near zero.
There are few ways that speech SHOULD be restricted, but generally private actors CAN restrict speech in their own domain – in their homes, their businesses etc.
They can also punish speech their do not like – by denying those whose speech they do not like anything that is Theirs to deny – jobs, access to their property.
With respect to Government – for the most part the opposite is true.
To a very limited extent govenrment as an employer has SOME of the ability to restrict speech as private employers.
But government can not as a consequence of your speech take from you something that is yours by RIGHT. It can not send you to jail, or take your property, or censor you.
The left over the course of 250 years has made the mistake of growing govenrment into most everything – and that is problematic – Govenrment can not through proxies do what govenrment can not do directly. Further agents of govenrment – those who take money from government, are generally bound to nearly the same rules as govenrment.
“What have I personally lied about ??”
Your posing as anonymous – just as you can claim no other anonymous post was you.
The rest of us can conclude that all other anonymous posts are you.
BTW there is no “Personally” with respect to anonymous posters.
You have eschewed and identity – when you use personally you are trying to claw back an identity that you have chosen to abandon.
That is a form of LYING.
You can not have it both ways.
Post as anonymous and ANY reference you make to an identity is a LIE,
Or post under an identity and build or destroy the credibility of that identity.
But there is no “personally” when you post as anonymous.
” you know I am right”
ROFL
Seriously ? Your arguments are garbage and other posters here are tied of rebutting the same stupid idiocy from you OVER AND OVER.
One of the major topics of this board is free speech.
Maybe there are some very fine points of free speech left to be debated.
Such as EXACTLY what are the free speech rights of visa holders or illegal immigrants, and can government on the basis of speech, revoke something that is NOT a right.
But the NYU case is trivial.
Government agents (colleges in this case) have almost the same constraints with respect to free speech as government.
Any public forum for speech that a college makes available to one campus group, it must make available to all.
You are free to make whatever stupid arguments you wish regarding the FedSoc event at NYU that NYU has unconstitutionally infringed on.
But you are not some genius who has figured out the loophole in the first amendment that hundreds of millions of people over 200 years could not find.
The burden of proof is on YOU – and it is far higher than you can possibly over come.
No one needs to “rebut” you – our law and long established principles of free speech already do that.
John Say the Stupid
Your comment:
It is not necessary to “rebut” you.
it is simpler just to ignore you.
You then refuse to ignore me and embark on yet another incoherent, rambling diatribe.
This is irrational and disturbed thinking.
You are unable to ignore me because of your profound obsessive-compulsive disorder.
You should feel free to completely ignore me.
I will not be offended in any way to be ignored by an unstable idiot.
I would encourage you to try to take control of yourself and completely ignore me.
Perhaps your psychiatrist can help you with this problem.
“Thank you once again for proving my point.”
That sounds like the corollary to the statement I made when first dealing with Sigmund Fraud who at that time was anonymous. No need to argue with him. He is just proving himself a jerk.
LOL Gigi, of course nobody believes you anymore, you are being paid by Chorus to disseminate your drivel and people know ir.
Yet more deflection and obfuscation.
You MAGA Mobsters really are incapable of resisting the urge to make stupid irrelevant comments.
This “nobody believes you” comment is a very common and recurring theme in the MAGA Mob.
Have you ever heard of the False Consensus Effect ???
It is a psychological effect prominent in weak minded people. Such people believe that their opinions and views are representative of the vast majority of the general population. These people believe that their views and opinions are “normal” and anyone who does not share these opinions is necessarily “abnormal”.
It is a profound psychological defect commonly found in cults.
Contrary to your assertion, you are all listening to me as proven by the numerous responses to my comments.
However, I don’t expect anyone here to be influenced in any way by what I say.
I simply point out the reality of the defective thought processes of MAGA Mobsters who are incapable of breaking free from the False Consensus Effect.
The reason that they are incapable of breaking free from this effect is due to another psychological defect found in cult members, the Dunning-Kruger effect.
This effect can be summarized as follows.
Stupid people are too stupid to realize how stupid they are.
Too stupid to realize ^^^^
See how easy that is, dum dum?
You continue to be guilty of the exact same behavior that you say is cultish.
Keep it coming, jester.
No we all hear you dum dum. Learn the difference.
““Nobody believes you” is not an argument or a rebuttal.”
Actually it is a quite legitimate one.
Everyone is free to speak.
We are also all free to choose who we listen to and MOST people eventually quit listening to liars.
The fact that John Say believes that “nobody believes you” is a legitimate argument simply confirms that he is a victim of both the False Consensus Effect and the Dunning-Kruger effect.
The assertion “nobody believes you” is a logical fallacy known as “appeal to popularity”, or argumentum ad populum.
It is another example of how weak minded people think.
He is too stupid to realize how stupid he is.
You are correct – the Ifs do not matter.
NYU may not do this PERIOD.
Does not matter whether it is the FedSoc or the campus LGBTQ+ group.
NYU must honor requests by campus groups to schedule free speech activities and it can not pick and choose which it allows.
It is All or none.
Turley is speculating – correctly as we all know, that this is about conservatives – though Shapiro is libertarian.
But that does not matter. Shapiro could be pro Hamas – NYU can not say no.
Yes, the left has tagged NYU. They’ve peed on it like dogs do. ☺
Anonymous hates it when her words written in the past are brought to attention on this forum.
She once vehemently exclaimed that censorship was not taking place on Twitter or Facebook.
https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/google-admits-censorship-under-biden-promises-end-bans-youtube-accounts. After Google has now admitted that there was censorship of conservatives on YouTube Anonymous has not come forward with a heartfelt apology for her previous positions. Once again she herself has revealed the makeup of her character. She wants us to forget but we will not. She just can’t put it together that Trump won because of the hysterical writings of her and others like her. Thank you Anonymous.
Even people on her/him’s side don’t believe each other. Even they know they’re lying and they encourage it.
Thinkitthrough
Thank you for providing a perfect example of the Mindless MAGA thought processes in action.
When all else fails, when you realize that I am right and you have nothing cogent, relevant or rational to say, then try changing the subject.
The Mindless MAGA Mob are the true masters of deflection, obfuscation and denial.
Congratulations for truly living up the the MAGA ideals and principles.
Maggie Haberman, talking about Hillary and the Democrats involved in the Russian collusion hoax: “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
That was small potatoes compared to Joe Stealin’s four years of lies and incompetence. He was hailed as a mentally acute by clowns like you until that lie didn’t work anymore. How about all the lipstick you put on that pig??
And what exactly does Maggie Haberman and Hillary have to do with NYU and Shapiro’s speech ??
As I said above, in the MAGA Mob when confronted with a rational argument at odds with the cult dogma, then standard operating procedure is to deflect and obfuscate with completely irrelevant comments about completely unrelated matters.
Congratulations for proving this point.
Cult?? You’re the cult. You’re the people who commit murder and celebrate the human sacrifice, remember?
TiT,
Well said. The fact they will never own up to all their assertions, their lies, their gaslighting does reveal their lack of character. That is the reason why they have to resort to being anonymous. Or, like Gigi and the slow and dumb one, change their names so many times. Dennis’s credibility is so in the toilet, he has to resort to using anonymous.
How marvelous!
Your ability to shovel sh!t is impressive.
Since you are here all day every day, I have always doubted that you are really a farmer.
However, your shoveling abilities suggest that I may be wrong, and you really are a farmer.
We can tell when somebody earnestly wants to discuss. You’re here to troll and spread lies to confuse people. You’re not even good at hiding your intentions.
Hey moron.. YOU are also here.
Jezzz
“Your ability to shovel sh!t is impressive.”
Upstate, thank you for keeping the road clean and making sure anonymous ends up where he is supposed to: in a latrine.
Here we see yet another of Meyer’s many psychiatric and psychological disorders, that of ingratiation.
These people are very insecure and have very low self esteem.
They compensate by attempting to ingratiate themselves in a sycophantic manner with people with whom they believe they have shared values and opinions.
He “sucks up” to UpStatefarmer, to use a colloquialism, in a desperate attempt at self-validation and in an attempt to confirm his place as “one of the gang”.
Really quite pitiful.
Sigmund, it sounds as if you were the piece of shite under discussion.
Meyer
This is one of your usual childish insults. Basically elementary or middle school stuff.
The psychological term for adults making childish insults is regression.
It is a defense mechanism whereby an adult with psychological problems reverts to a more immature pattern of behavior.
It is a sign of emotional immaturity and low intelligence.
The list of your psychiatric disorders grows ever longer.
Is there no end to this pathology ??
S. Meyer IS one of the gang. You are NOT.
So is good people like OldManFromKS, HullBobby, Lin, John Say, Young, James, Floyd, WiseOldLawyer, probably a few others I forgot and of course the good professor. As I have stated in the past, these good people, I would gladly get together with any of them for a cup of coffee, lunch and Lin and I have mused about a dinner get together, followed by a good fire, good music, good wine and good conversation.
Knowing their propensity for violence, I would not want to ever meet the likes of self-proclaimed domestic antifa terrorist, Dennis. Nor the mentally unhinged Gigi. The equally unhinged slow and dumb one. And most certainly, not you. Just look at your comments. Whom would ever want to share air space with you? Not I. And I would be ever so better for it.
“S. Meyer IS one of the gang. You are NOT.”
At last we have confirmation that the motley collection of regulars here are nothing more than an elementary school level gang of misfits who get together and commiserate when they are feeling rejected by their peers.
Tell me, do you have secret decoder rings, do you meet in a secret hideout, do you have secret passwords, do you make fun of those icky girls who ignore you ???
Tell me, I promise not to let anyone else know your little secrets.
S. Meyer,
Thank you!
It is quite amazing how the annony moron seems to know everything. He knows what people are thinking. He knows what occupations they hold. And now he is trying to claim he can diagnosis psychiatric and psychological disorders . . . from a comment.
It is rather curious how he claims I am here, “. . . 15 hours, M — F . . . ” Rather specific wouldn’t you say? Then I pointed out this morning how his first comment of the day was at 7:17 AM and he was still commenting on the good professor’s blog as late as 10:00 PM the previous evening. I previously noted the time hacks of my comments vs his. Quite telling of who is really here 15 hours a day. Almost like a confession or perhaps projection . . .
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/10/02/the-farbman-turley-debate-the-video-and-results/#comment-2560376
Then he claims, “I assume you have shite for brains too.” A another curious claim, as if I have shite for brains then how is it I outsmarted him, once again,
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/10/02/the-farbman-turley-debate-the-video-and-results/#comment-2560428
So, if I have “shite for brains,” what does he have? I mean, if this uneducated i.e. non-college educated, farmer can,
“Once again, I easily prove you wrong. Do you get tired of me, proving you wrong so often? It is almost as if, knowing your lower elevator level IQ, I set a trap for you and you stepped right into it. Then I come back and prove you wrong. For everyone who reads the comments to see. And that is a lot of people!”
then what kind of brains does he have? Seems the correct answer would be he has no logic, reason, critical thinking or common sense.
How marvelous!!!
The anony-moron Sigmund Fraud has an empty head. Everyone sees how he strings words together without facts or value. He avoids facts because every time he tries, someone has to correct him.
S. Meyer,
Ah! Facts. Those are something of a anathema to the annony moron and our leftist friends. When confronted with them, they resort to word salad deflection, lies or gaslighting. The good news is, those of us with a degree of logic, reason, critical thinking and common sense see through them, easily. The polling numbers of those Americans who see through the Schumer Shutdown does give me a degree of optimism that the mid-terms will favor the Republicans and deal a blow to the Democrats. With each and every Trump win, we are assured a Republican win in the mid-terms and in 2028!!
Meyer
You state:
“Everyone sees how he strings words together without facts or value”
This statement is a classic textbook example of the False Consensus Effect.
This is a psychological effect prominent in weak minded people. Such people believe that their opinions and views are representative of the vast majority of the general population. In other words, they believe EVERYONE else thinks just like themselves. These people believe that their views and opinions are “normal” and anyone who does not share these opinions is necessarily “abnormal”.
As I said above the list of your psychiatric disorders grows ever larger with every comment you make here.
Yes, Sigmund Fraud, the false consensus effect does exist, but isn’t something one can say when so many others on the list feel the same as I do.
Today, on your side exists, anonymous, you and George Svelaz X. On the other side are all those who argue with your ignorant statements under your generic Icon and name, anonymous.
Congratulations !!!!
You have just self-confirmed that you are a victim of the false consensus effect.
You have obviously Googled this term, but your shallow thinking does not allow you to understand what it means.
Your claim that you are not affected by this phenomenon because there are so many others that agree with you, is in fact confirmation of the effect. You believe that there are many others that feel the same as you do, and very few that disagree. This, by definition, is what the false consensus effect is all about.
Unfortunately you are too stupid to understand this because you are also a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
You are a veritable cornucopia of psychological defects !!!!
Sigmund Fraud, your limited brainpower shows every time you parrot the same phrase, as if repetition could pass for intelligence. You finally tack on “self-confirmed” like a child adding a new word he just learned. It’s obvious you overheard the phrase somewhere and clung to it. That is all you’ve got. Repeating borrowed words is a sign, recognizing his lack of knowledge and confidence. Tell me, were you the runner at a mental hospital, or just one of the patients allowed out for exercise?
Oh, please. The NYU administration does not have the courage to face down the same people who have been clogging the Columbia campus, and slope-shoulders to a better date and location. Sort of like the American Embassy in London changing the Independence Day event to July 7.
Correction: MAG Patriots are neither mindless nor mob-ish. These two factors are the specialty of leftist/Marxist-amoral-“protesters.”
Don’t forget murdering and intimidating debate partners. Those are also specialties of the Left:
LOL The Orwellian canard that screaming protests that prevent speakers you don’t agree with to speak is “their free speech” is the most stupid and outrageous argument you can present. And why didn’t NYU cancelled any of the other events on that day that drained the security resources?
The only ones shoveling shun to the cancelling mob is NYU and you, as part of that mob, willingly approves.
Sorry ATS
Fed Soc at their own expense moved off campus – NYU can not push them into that.
This is typical of left wing nuts.
If you are subject to the first amendment you may not pick and choose who gets to speak.
Any opportunity that a college provides to any campus group – must be available to all campus groups.
Security is the responsibility of the college, but it can not use security as a basis to deny access or to locate an event off campus.
If you are subject to first amendment constraints – you can not impose any criteria that results in the appearance of content based outcomes.
NYU would be in violation of the first amendment if they moved protests by campus groups – off campus.
If they moved jewish events off campus. If they moves DEI events or LGBTQ+ events off campus.
Or imposed any constraints on one group not on others.
You can not use minimizing protests as a criteria AT ALL.
You Can however deny access to campus to protesters that are not by campus groups, that have scheduled those protests in the same way that Fed Soc did.
If there is a Campus Hamas group – they are free to schedule a protest with NYU on Oct 7,
But if they show up Oct 7 unscheduled – they can be removed from campus.
I will ask the same question I asked X. Would a civil rights group wishing to commemorate Juneteenth in Harlem accept being told they can have their event on a different date in a different place, say Staten Island? There’s a reason we don’t commemorate Pearl Harbor on Dec 12 or 9/11 on —- well a date other than 9/11. The date is the point.
Professor Turley always enrages The Furry Murderous Trannies from their Alphabet Sex Pride Tribe geldings.
And the motto of those Furry Trannies: “If we ain’t lying and denying… then we’re probably writing messages on our ammunition”.
Thank you, thank you for such a great article. I always look forward to your writings and appearances.
You gotta take into account that these leftys can’t think clearly.
today’s commies are inept. They can only convince their idiots, their ignorant “mob”.
The union of socialist teachers failed to indoctrinate our young and now the left is crumbling to dust.
Today’s left is a complete failure.
The best part of it; it took ONE determined man to totally destroy them.
Despite all their propaganda, crimes, mass of morons, indoctrinators, the MSM No-context hyperbolic news, their we-can-see-you shallow deep state,
they cannot stand up to even the slightest scrutiny for their positions because of ONE man.
Trump said “This will never be a socialist nation”. (remember Trump was right about everything)
Sorry commie! You lose again – All because of Trump. ha ha. Thank God for that man.
As we have seen and heard by their actions and words, there is cause for concern as we all know leftists are prone to violence. They are hyper-emotional, getting so called triggered and lash out with violence. Their rage rhetoric, elevating the chances of violence against anyone who would disagree with them. I would never turn my back on a leftist, and keep my hand close to my knife (it is legal to carry a long blade) just in case they see or hear something they disagree with and go on a violent rampage.
Upstate
violent rampage.
Take a small peek at Portland. Even reporters are not safe.
Thank You Professor Turley, for another well written article.
As an independent that came of age in the 1960’s, it saddens me to read about these kinds of actions. I thought and perhaps I am wrong, that our generation wanted discussions, learning and exploring varied possibilities not just in drugs but society as a whole. Has our generation lapsed into what the radicals, (Venceremos, Students for a Democratic Society, Weather Underground) etc.. I thought that was all rejected as not in the meaning of Love, Peace and happiness. Are the professors and administrators our generation or our children’s. How did this happen? Did we give up on society or become oblivious due to other priorities like trying to make ends meet with growing families and difficult economic times? What can we do now that will influence or change the trajectory? I for one have tried to discuss things with friends but the ones that would most always benefit, in my opinion, always reject the messenger instead of evaluating the message.
I also came of age in the sixties. What happened is that, while many of us grew up and pursued our respective professions, the more liberal among us pursued degrees in education. What we see now is the result of decades of liberal, anti-establishment education.
“while many of us grew up and pursued our respective professions, the more liberal among us pursued degrees in education. ”
Same generation. My experience is that the Marxist teachers’ unions were actively recruiting HS students at the time, luring them with promises of little work, good pay with job security, and Summers off. I don’t recall anything mentioned about satisfaction from improving young minds…
During my lifetime, I have witnessed “freedom of speech” being used as a brick bat against freedom of speech.
And liberal judges allowing.
This is NOT what the First Amendment is meant to protect.
The First Amendment does not protect hecklers from repercussions.
The First Amendment doesn’t offer protection, but the university administrators and faculty do, likely because they taught and/or agree with the hecklers.
Actually, 1A should offer protection against viewpoint discrimination on a publicly funded campus
“Actually, 1A should offer protection against viewpoint discrimination on a publicly funded campus”
I understand your argument, given certain preexisting conditions. However, the bottom line is that there should bot BE any campuses funded directly or indirectly with Federal funds.
“should not BE”
No, the real bottom line is the subject of the opinion column: that there should not be a hecklers’ veto at ANY university, whether it gets federal funding or not.
I agree with no federal funding for universities unless for a legitimate and specific purpose i.e. research development of computer chips to make more lethal weapons for our military. But that’s a separate topic.
To me, one of the reasons they shut down the conservative speakers, and not the liberal speakers is because the need for security is greater. The conservative people aren’t shooting the liberal people.
“The First Amendment does not protect hecklers from repercussions.”
True. Which is ironic given that Shapiro made a very stupid tweet that got him in trouble and got fired from Georgetown if I remember correctly. He was against cancel culture back then.
1. Nothing about his Tweets were “very stupid”. He opined that Sri Srinivasan was objectively Biden’s best pick for SCOTUS. But Biden had already disqualified from consideration everybody who is not a black woman. So by defintion, anybody who is not Sri Srinivasan is a “lesser black woman”. Of course, Biden proves Shaprio correct and nominates Ketanji Jackson, a black woman who swore under oath she could not define what a woman is because she’s not a biologist. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.
Since you choose to describe the tweets using inflamatory language, rather than provide them for readers to decide for themselves how bad they are, here they are:
https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/ilya-shapiro-tweets-about-biden-supreme-court-nominee
2. Shapiro was not fired. After Left wing trash manufactured a fake outrage bruhaha to get him cancelled, Georgetown decided to suspend him while it conducted an investigation. The investigation lasted four months. At it’s conclusion, Georgetown offered to reinstate Shapiro. But considering how poorly he’d been treated, he chose to resign.
You basically got nothing right.
“if I remember correctly.”
George Svelaz, he wasn’t fired. He left. You remember nothing and understand less.
S. Meyer, that is why I prefixed my comment with “If”. Surely you understand what that means. But just in case, it implies that I’m not entirely sure if that is what happened.
The word if is very clear. That is what I was talking about. You remember nothing, as you admitted (“If I remember”). You weren’t even sure about that, but the good news is your memory isn’t as bad as your understanding.
GeorgeX stupidly says – as he always does – that he will declare somebody’s tweet to be stupid, And due to his belief that tweet was stupid, that justified Georgetown university firing him for exercising his free speech.
Whether it was stupid as GeorgeX claims – or simply free speech that was true and because it was true deeply offended GeorgeX and other Marxist Useless Idiots.
So why does not some law firm or lawyer offer pro bono assistance to the Conservatives and file law suits with a view to force the Universities to refrain from such one way treatments of those they care not to speak?
Surely, there are law firms and other interested parties that have the financial ability to fund such efforts and thus stand up for that freedom of speech being denied to others? Where is the ACLU on this….of course we know that answer as they have forsaken the cause they came into being to pursue.
If all it takes is a Heckler’s Veto…then perhaps we need to step to the plate and start heckling the Left!
What if five hundred such folks got there first and took up all of the seats and politely interrupted with questions to the speakers.
How would the radical Left react to that….with polite respect and tolerance? I bet not!
Then upon being assaulted that same law firm could file Civil Suits for damages and in time make a darn good living out of it.
Instead of just writing articles and books…perhaps the Good Professor might take up a new kind of law and help make this a much better country to live in and call home.
So when a child throws a temper tantrum s/he should be given whatever s/he wants, thereby reinforcing that behavior? Or have NYU faculty and administrators taught their students to support Hamas over Israel, and these students are being rewarded for making demands that are consistent with what they’ve been taught? Perhaps the administrators, faculty, and students should watch some of the more graphic films of the atrocities committed Hama against the Israelis on 10/7/2023.
You got to give the left at least partial credit. Fear of having buildings set ablaze has silenced conservative points of view on many/most college campuses.
No they have not. What red blooded Rep. wouldn’t be happy to die for MAGA. Get a highway named after them.
While conservatives write letters and hold prayer vigils, believing they are fighting the fight.
100% correct. Either fascism we will defeat fascism (the real fascists – the left) or they will defeat us. If we defeat them, everyone can go on living and trying to enjoy life. If they defeat us – you know.
Are you commenting from your bunker?
Is Professor Turley aware that the situation following Charlie Kirk’s assassination has raised safety and security concerns regarding highly controversial subjects?
This issue extends beyond the denial of a forum for a conservative speaker. The contentious nature of the talk and the likelihood of a large protest may pose security challenges for the school’s staff.
“In the past, universities have been quick to utilize such rationales to shut down conservative speakers. It is a passive-aggressive stance where they throw up their hands and claim that expected protests forced them into this action.”
That may have been the case in the past, but today is different in light of Charlie Kirk’s assassination. There are heightened security concerns, and the controversy surrounding the subject presents an increased risk for the school.
“Once again, it is the mob that prevailed in dictating what can be discussed on campus while administrators stand in silent acquiescence.”
No, this is about safety and security. In our current, highly charged political atmosphere marked by extreme partisanship, one would think it unwise to hold a controversial talk on October 7 about the massacre in Israel, especially while Israel is presently engaged in actions characterized as genocide against the Palestinians.
This situation is akin to hosting a pro-Muslim speech six months after 9/11. It’s an ill-advised idea, despite the principles of free speech. Safety and security must take precedence over a temporary inconvenience.
The school is not canceling the speaker because he is conservative. They are simply requesting a change in when the speech can take place. Doesn’t this align with the constitutional Time, Place, and Manner restrictions? If the school deems the speech too risky and controversial at the preferred time, they can certainly modify the time, manner, and place to accommodate the speaker as best as they can. The school must prioritize security and safety now more than ever, especially after the Charlie Kirk incident.
So X’s argument is that since leftists kill conservatives we need to, or at least it is understandable to, ban conservative speakers. Doesn’t this sound more like the Brown Shirts than the actions of Trump or Republicans. Kill conservatives in order to ban conservatives from talking is the position of X. Or Svelaz, or Gigi or whichever paid moron this little girl really is.
They are not banning him. They are asking him to change the time of his speech. It’s not an unreasonable request. Plus there are indeed legitimate security concerns in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination.
LIke I asked, is the school simply exercising prudent precautions and offering reasonable accomodations? Because they are not saying he can’t speak on campus, but Turley is making it more than it is to reinforce the false narrative that conservatives are targeted for being conservative.
This idiot will defend anything just for the sake of hearing her own voice. Hey X, would you be ok if a far right wing radical group caused a banning of a speech by Kamala Harris on MLK Day? Juneteenth? How about causing a gay speech to be moved from the month of June? DO you ever hear yourself?
HullBobby,
That is why I do not waste my time reading the slow and dumb one. All you have to do is hear the village idiot to know it is best to just not listen to the idiot.
Hullbobby, the fool you are dealing with, George Svelaz, suggested that Charlie Kirk’s assassination has raised “increasing security concerns.” Conservative events have faced cancellations for years. I still remember Milo Yiannopoulos being escorted out of a burning building during a riot. That was about eight years ago.
The solution is simple: cancel every other event and redirect the funds to ensure Shapiro’s speech takes place. Establish a clear safety perimeter and arrest anyone who crosses the line. Repeat until the problem is solved.
S, Meyer,
“Charlie Kirk’s assassination has raised “increasing security concerns.”
You don’t think so?
“The solution is simple: cancel every other event and redirect the funds to ensure Shapiro’s speech takes place. Establish a clear safety perimeter and arrest anyone who crosses the line. Repeat until the problem is solved.”
Are you sure it’s that simple?
Canceling the other events who were likely planned before Shapiro’s to accomodate Shapiro’s security issue is your solution? Wow. You are indeed stupid.
The events at NYU are planned on and scheduled on a rolling basis. If other events were already planned and scheduled before Shapiro means Shapiro is not a priority. The school did try to acommodate him, but it was Shapiro’s schedule that remained inflexible. He was also scheduled to host a 7 hour symposium at NYU on the same day. Did you know that?
“but today is different in light of Charlie Kirk’s assassination.”
You’re a dunce. I showed you how violent things were eight years ago. You seemed not to recognize that.
Shapiro was cancelled because he is a conservative, just like Milo had to be escorted out of his speech for fear he would be killed. The building was already on fire.
George now knows all about NYU scheduling. Lmao
Upstatefarmer,
“All you have to do is hear the village idiot to know it is best to just not listen to the idiot.”
That makes no sense. Here you can’t “hear” what I say without having to read it first. You still read what I say, otherwise why would you complain about what you supposedly didn’t read?
Say what??? Cant hear you.
Hullbobby, your attempt to equate this situation is misguided.
NYU has legitimate concerns regarding security and safety. It is reasonable for the university to suggest rescheduling Shapiro’s speech due to the potential disruptions from protests and the lack of staff available to manage the expected crowd.
In light of the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, along with his controversial views, there is a real risk involved. This does not prevent Shapiro from speaking on campus at another time that might be less contentious. The Supreme Court has upheld time, place, and manner restrictions on speech, and these guidelines are being applied here.
The university ultimately has the final say on matters of safety and security. This does not constitute a denial of Shapiro’s speech simply because he is conservative. Professor Turley is being disingenuous in his portrayal of this situation.
The response to “security concerns” is not to burden the person speaking it’s to burden those disrupting. if a college campus can’t assure the safety of speakers on campus does free speech really exist? “Sure you can speak as long as you don’t mind dying for it” is a weird notion of free speech.
I can’t help but notice that it’s all in one direction. There’s no conservatives threatening to assassinate those who are celebrating the life of convicted terrorist Assata Shakur. It’s leftist threats against conservatives.
“while Israel is presently engaged in actions characterized as genocide against the Palestinians.”
If the conditions in Gaza are so bad, why don’t the Gazans release the hostages? Why do they repeated reject cease-fire offers?
“This situation is akin to hosting a pro-Muslim speech six months after 9/11.”
Are you perhaps too young to remember the Whitehouse itself repeatedly making pro-Muslim speeches after 9/11?? Bush and practically every other politician were saying “Islam is a religion of peace” five times a day.
Bush was a fool.
“Bush was a fool.”
At best…
X
Is Professor Turley aware that the situation following Charlie Kirk’s assassination has raised safety and security concerns regarding highly controversial subjects?
______________________
So george, you support groups that attacks (free speech) for conservative folks. (Antifa & BLM)
Just look at Portland. News reporter are not safe there. (highly controversial subject)
Remember that so called free speech issue.
The lib left is full of hate and nothing more. Just you’re kind of folks.
ummm…. safety and security from what? Answer: The mob. Using the Kirk assassination as a claim for the reasonableness of burdening conservative speech is grotesque.
” Israel is presently engaged in actions characterized as genocide against the Palestinians.”
What genocide? There is none. Israel is at war because Hamas committed genocide on October 7 and openly declares its goal to kill every Jew. That is not speculation; it’s written in their charter and shouted in their streets.
All sane and thinking people recognize that Hamas seeks the extermination of the Jewish people. Israel, by contrast, has urged civilians to evacuate and could end this war in a moment, if Hamas would simply lay down its arms and release its hostages. That is not genocide; it is self-defense.
And if Israel wanted to commit genocide, why would it be sending thousands of trucks of food and other aid in to help the civilians, much more so than the aid that just gets stolen by Hamas and sold on the black market?
Right, Kansas, and if Israel wasn’t trying to save the lives of women and children, the war would have been over in less than a week. One might believe that by taking the slow route, more deaths occurred.
The European nations that agreed to a Palestinian state also agreed to more Palestinian deaths and more war in the future.
Meyer – in my opinion the European politicians who agreed to such a state – which will never exist – undoubtedly knew their action would lead to more war and more deaths, and that it would make peace virtually impossible. They did so in a cynical capitulation to their own immigrant populations. They have acted in the most craven and condemnable manner conceivable and will be severely judged by history.
S. Meyer,
Well said. They also ignore current events a historic peace deal, by way of Trump, is possible. Hamas is the key if the peace deal goes through.
S. Meyer, clearly you don’t understand what the term “genocide” means.
Even Israel’s foremost experts on genocide agree Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians.
The high ground of “self-defense” as Israel’s argument ceased to be true a long time ago. Israel is not defending itself right now. It’s committing genocide and ethnic cleansing.
Nobody is buying Israels excuses now. Opinion on Israel is souring badly and it’s because their continuing destruction of Gaza and subequent genocide.
The word genocide has a definition: “The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.”
Tell us how that definition is met by your claims. You can’t because you are an ignorant fool who doesn’t know the meaning of the words you use. The population of the Gazans is rising, and that makes you sound like an idiot.
Rabble:
“Even Israel’s foermoest experts on genocide…” Source: Just trust me bro. Bring some damn evidence, or else we will just continue to conclude your “experts” are nothing but your own schizophrenic rambling alter personalities.
“Even Israel’s foremost experts on genocide”
Lmaooooooooo
My god, there is NOTHING this idiot wont claim.
“Foremost experts on genocide”
What a hysterical stooge!!!
The prog/left is resembling, more and more, the sort of controlled culture of all authoritarian, communist regimes. Very similar in nature, also, to islamic control or even that leveled upon Spain during the Inquisition. It is either agree with us and follow our controls or you will be eliminated.
At this point in America, and even Europe, the progs grasp as control as they see resistance to their authoritarian grip on culture slipping away.
We still do not know the fate of that young man who confronted rows of tanks in Tienanmen Square but we do know what happened to Charlie Kirk.
Our most important task, now, is to keep standing up to “the tanks” so to speak, and resist and expose each and every attempt by the flagging progs to maintain control over the minds of so many in our nation.
Are we as brave as that young Chinese man or Charlie Kirk, or will we just stay silent until we are herded into boxcars for even thinking of freedom?
I find it astonishing that any thinking parent would allow a child living under their roof to attend an institution of “higher education” that aggressively seeks to destroy the very civilization and culture in which that family has prospered enough to pay the outrageous tuition that institution demands.
Lib parents… what can I say
Good lord, we pray you’re no a parent. Any kid would be embarrassed by your kind. Wondering, do you have front teeth?
Prove me work loser
I plead guilty Your Honor, and I am now reaping the “benefits” of that “education”.
This is the same academia that is propelling The Communist andradical Islamist, Mamdami, to the mayors office
Peaceably assemble . It’s an assembly. Clearly NYU wants to celebrate Oct 7. Call the governor or Mayor Mamdani. Expect celebrations on 911. NY is lost.
Big dogs in hell…so impressive.
Mob rule wins. There’s the Nature’s Law at work.
Propaganda mills, such as NYU, are beneath contempt. I can’t imagine considering a graduate of NYU for a managerial track position.
I assume that anyone that would hire an NYU grad is probably also an NYU grad. Or a similar garbage school.
Just because you failed in life, no degree, no need to belittle NYU.
Ano
The little 15yr old throws child-like insults.
Which shows, you have never been close to any collage.