We received a comment that the First Amendment does not apply to private institutions as they can implement their own rules for faculty and students. Thoughts on this?
"Free government....must not be permitted to degenerate into the unrestrained authority of a mere majority or the unbridled weight of a mere influential few....President Coolidge (1926).
If individuals are restricted from free speech within "private institutions" new legal precedent is established. A different set of rules for thee but not for me is established. Censorship of free speech is a form of verbal slavery restricting, punishing and segregating society. Individuals who do not conform are then subject to punishment? Will educational institutions, churches, social media platforms, etc. be the next target of forced "restricted speech"? The First Amendment applies to every American NO matter their physical location or venue of communicating. The Constitution is NOT void at private institutions.
Instead of rationalizing the taking away of a private entity’s rights because of other unconstitutional laws, we should focus on and work to undo said unconstitutional laws.
As was pointed out, the Constitution is limits on the government, not the people. The issue is that big institutions and corporations are getting protection and financial help from the government, which “allows” the government to use them. We should be fighting for the corporations’, ie facebook, rights to do what they want, even if we don’t agree with them. (Then we take our business somewhere else- free-enterprise)
We should focus this fight on what the government is doing wrong, and address that. This issue wreaks of activist modus operendi, creating a situation where the people ask for, even advocate for, the activist’s desired outcome. If we help them take away the rights of institutions, the next target will be small businesses, churches, then homes and people…
No! They are not exempt from any other anti discrimination laws. If a baker can be forced to bake a gay wedding cake because it is a public accomodation business, other businesses have to accept all speech
"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"
The 1st Amendment limits the actions of the government, specifically Congress, not private citizens or companies.; with the exception that "The Supreme Court has stated that "a private entity can qualify as a state actor in a few limited circumstances," such as "[1] when the private entity performs a traditional, exclusive public function; [2] when the government compels the private entity to take a particular action; or [3] when the government acts jointly with the private entity."3
What is the rule of law and why is it important? The rule of law is that both the government and all the governed are subject to the law - All are to be treated the same. The government works FOR the people, not above the people. This means that the rules apply to everyone in the same manner, regardless of his/her status, power, race or age.
Not taking a side here, mentioning this just for consideration: the first several, well-known, and arguably most vital amendments specifically mention “the people” as the recipients of rights. At what point do institutions become “the people?” How do we know what rights belong to who (or what) based on the language of the amendments?
Good question! This is similar to the idea of LLC's being considered their own entity. The institutions are made up of "the people" and function (or are supposed to) under the law of the land. While institutions can have their own set of policies, these cannot be unconstitutional. WSU, for example, actually has their own policies that purport to uphold free speech and academic freedom.
Absolutely nothing exempts anyone, or any institutions within the borders of the US of A, and it territories, from the bill of rights & the Constitution of the United States of America.
This is just an excuse for agencies to infiltrate "private institutions" like big tech and use them to violate the constitution in ways they can't do so openly like they would like to.
"Free government....must not be permitted to degenerate into the unrestrained authority of a mere majority or the unbridled weight of a mere influential few....President Coolidge (1926).
If individuals are restricted from free speech within "private institutions" new legal precedent is established. A different set of rules for thee but not for me is established. Censorship of free speech is a form of verbal slavery restricting, punishing and segregating society. Individuals who do not conform are then subject to punishment? Will educational institutions, churches, social media platforms, etc. be the next target of forced "restricted speech"? The First Amendment applies to every American NO matter their physical location or venue of communicating. The Constitution is NOT void at private institutions.
I think we need to be very careful!!
Instead of rationalizing the taking away of a private entity’s rights because of other unconstitutional laws, we should focus on and work to undo said unconstitutional laws.
As was pointed out, the Constitution is limits on the government, not the people. The issue is that big institutions and corporations are getting protection and financial help from the government, which “allows” the government to use them. We should be fighting for the corporations’, ie facebook, rights to do what they want, even if we don’t agree with them. (Then we take our business somewhere else- free-enterprise)
We should focus this fight on what the government is doing wrong, and address that. This issue wreaks of activist modus operendi, creating a situation where the people ask for, even advocate for, the activist’s desired outcome. If we help them take away the rights of institutions, the next target will be small businesses, churches, then homes and people…
Let’s not go after the cheese in the trap!
No! They are not exempt from any other anti discrimination laws. If a baker can be forced to bake a gay wedding cake because it is a public accomodation business, other businesses have to accept all speech
No way does an institution take away our First Amendment rights. The constitution supersedes private institution rules.
"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"
The 1st Amendment limits the actions of the government, specifically Congress, not private citizens or companies.; with the exception that "The Supreme Court has stated that "a private entity can qualify as a state actor in a few limited circumstances," such as "[1] when the private entity performs a traditional, exclusive public function; [2] when the government compels the private entity to take a particular action; or [3] when the government acts jointly with the private entity."3
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt1-7-2-4/ALDE_00013541/
Could it be argued that a near monopoly entity such as FB etc. performs an exclusive public function?
I think that should be tested in court.
As for " the government acts jointly with the private entity" that seems plain tn the case of FB, and (IMO) is a clear violation.
Nonsense. As libs stated: "nobody is above the law." The Constitution applies to everyone.
What is the rule of law and why is it important? The rule of law is that both the government and all the governed are subject to the law - All are to be treated the same. The government works FOR the people, not above the people. This means that the rules apply to everyone in the same manner, regardless of his/her status, power, race or age.
Not taking a side here, mentioning this just for consideration: the first several, well-known, and arguably most vital amendments specifically mention “the people” as the recipients of rights. At what point do institutions become “the people?” How do we know what rights belong to who (or what) based on the language of the amendments?
Good question! This is similar to the idea of LLC's being considered their own entity. The institutions are made up of "the people" and function (or are supposed to) under the law of the land. While institutions can have their own set of policies, these cannot be unconstitutional. WSU, for example, actually has their own policies that purport to uphold free speech and academic freedom.
Absolutely nothing exempts anyone, or any institutions within the borders of the US of A, and it territories, from the bill of rights & the Constitution of the United States of America.
Absolutely!
Nonsense! Private institutions are not immune to observing civil rights law.
What makes them immune from discrimination on the basis of thought and the expression of an opinion?
More evidence to the utter collapse of the “knowledge system”.
Free speech as long as you only repeat a narrative.
This is just an excuse for agencies to infiltrate "private institutions" like big tech and use them to violate the constitution in ways they can't do so openly like they would like to.
100%! Oddly, it's pretty out-in-the-open nowadays, which keeps us busy!