Yet Another Misunderstanding of what “Free Speech” Means…..
So I read today that my old Criminal Law Professor Larry Connell settled his lawsuit with Widener University School of Law:
Associate Professor Lawrence Connell will not continue teaching at Widener, and the terms of the agreement were confidential. Widener officials and Connell’s attorney, Thomas S. Neuberger, both called the resolution “amicable” and declined to comment further.
Connell had been on administrative leave since December 2010 after he was accused of violating Widener’s harassment and discrimination rules. Among his alleged transgressions, Connell was said to have used graphic hypothetical examples involving the law school’s dean, Linda Ammons, during his spring 2010 criminal law class.
In one instance, he said he “blew her [expletive] head off” when trying to make a point about criminal intent in a murder case, according to university documents explaining the reasons for his dismissal. In another example, he had students imagine Ammons was dealing drugs out of her office. Connell has said he used bombastic examples to help students remember legal concepts, and he alleged Ammons, who is black, targeted him because he was known as an outspoken conservative on campus. Several conservative bloggers and advocates for academic freedom have said Widener was trampling on Connell’s free speech rights.
Professor Connell may have had grounds for wrongful termination or suspension. He may have had grounds for libel. He may have other remedies depending on what his contract with Widener states. But the one thing I know without a shadow of a doubt: his “Free Speech” rights were not trampled upon or violated in any way.
People across the political spectrum and throughout society wrongfully believe the First Amendment right to Free Speech means that every American has the right to say anything they want at any time they want at any place they want without any consequence whatsoever.
They are wrong.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That’s the First Amendment. What does it say? Whom does it prohibit from violating the free speech rights fo the citizenry? Are corporations or businesses mentioned in this wording above? Is a university mentioned? Are employers mentioned? No. The First Amendment only prevents the federal, state and local governments from violating your free speech rights. It says nothing about private action.
The First Amendment has never been interpreted as providing any protection against purely private action. Private authority figures can do whatever the hell they want. They can censor their subordinate’s speech, or discriminate on the basis of speech, without any legal consequences. “All may dismiss their employees at will,…for good cause, for no cause, or even for a cause morally wrong, without thereby being guilty of a legal wrong.” Payne v. Western & Atlantic Railroad Co., 81 Tenn. 507, 519-520, 1884 WL 469 at *6 (Sep. term 1884); see also Korb v. Raytheon, 574 N.E.2d 370, 410 Mass. 581 (1991).
A friend of mine attended an Eagles game this season. He had been tailgating for several hours before the game, and he was drinking. He liked to taunt fans of the opposing team. Once we were inside the stadium, another friend and I went to the bathroom. During this time, the other friend went up to a guy wearing the opposing team’s jersey, and made some more taunting comments, and allegedly, said he was going to buy a beer and pour it on him. It was at that moment that security guards swooped in from each direction and they carried my friend off to the detention area under the stadium.
You see, as it turns out, the fan of the opposing team was an undercover security guard, and the Philadelphia Eagles, knowing the rowdiness of their fans, seek to preemptively oust the potential troublemakers before any real trouble starts. So they hire security guards and plant them throughout the stadium looking for potential trouble makers. Which is their absolute right. The Philadelphia Eagles are a private organization. Lincoln Financial Field is private property. They have the right to set and enforce the rules in their organization and on their property.
I had to bail my friend out, and he was incensed that his free speech and property rights were violated. And I had a horrible time explaining to him that he was sh*t out of luck.
Americans, you have no right to say everything you want without consequence. It is why bloggers use pseudonym in case our employers have problems with what we write here.
legality question…. what if your employer IS the government… or what if your place of employment is subsidized by federal or state money?
I believe the courts have ruled that when the government is the employer, the aspects of employment law that apply to private employers apply to the government as well. However, I suspect union contracts, employment contracts and other national security laws take precedence over free speech rights. Indeed, I suspect that before you sign on to work for the U.S. Government, you waive some rights.
interesting.. well, to that, i say..
FIRE!!!! THERE’S A FIRE!!!!!!!!!! RUN!!!!!!
LOL
Public financing accounted for half the cost of Lincoln Financial Field, which is jointly owned by the city and the Eagles. I guess free speech depends where you are standing in the stadium. My guess is your friend could have been detained for public intoxication, harassment or general assholery, as well as saying something really stupid.
However, your point is well taken. I try to tell people all the time that the First Amendment means that the government cannot restrict your speech, but your employer and other private entities surely can.