News

After Court Restores Research Funding, Trump Still Has Paths to Target Harvard

News

‘Honestly, I’m Fine with It’: Eliot Residents Settle In to the Inn as Renovations Begin

News

He Represented Paul Toner. Now, He’s the Fundraising Frontrunner in Cambridge’s Municipal Elections.

News

Harvard College Laundry Prices Increase by 25 Cents

News

DOJ Sues Boston and Mayor Michelle Wu ’07 Over Sanctuary City Policy

No Limits to Action

DISSENTING OPINION

By David L. Yermack

WE ARE PLEASED that the majority has condemned the University's discipline of a select few of the protestors at Caspar W. Weinberger '38's November address. Certainly this action reeks of selectivism, political repression, and undue delay.

However, we disagree that Harvard--or any other private institution--can issue is own guidelines to cover the rights of speakers. Cases like the Weinberger disruption involve innumerable nuances of civil liberties. Using them as a departure point for creating one's own First Amendment standards only invites arbitrariness and future abuse of any such power the University might try to assume for itself.

The Constitution guarantees free expression to all, and the University's control of a podium does not give it license to regulate behavior of an audience. Only the courts can interpret the law, and only legislatures can write it. The University should never define official limits for a speaker's or an audience's actions.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags