South Dakota College Republicans Endorse Campus Free Speech Act
South Dakota College Republican Chairwoman, Emily Novotny, announced today that she has endorsed House Bill 1073, otherwise known as the Campus Free Speech Act. This bill is scheduled to have its first hearing in the House Judiciary Committee in the coming week.
“Our Universities should be institutions of free thought where debate should be open and free, not ‘safe spaces’ where people pass rules to avoid being challenged. If we can’t openly have conversations, explore different ideas, and debate at our Universities, where on earth can we have these conversations?”
The measure, which was introduced by Republican State Representative Michael Clark, was introduced because of incidents across the country where various speakers have be shut down on campuses for differing opinions.
Representative Clark along with many others in the State Legislature want to ensure that South Dakota does not become a place where free speech is suffocated.
Novotny said, “South Dakota needs to be a state that promotes free speech everywhere, whether we agree with that speech or not. My hope is that this bill will pass through the State Legislature as a sign of support and insurance of the enduring right to free speech throughout the great state of South Dakota.”
###
Thanks for these brave College Republicans! where is our wishy washy Attorney General? Why isn’t he supporting this? He lost my vote.
No he didn’t. Show some integrity. Admit you’re a Noem supporter and that you are just using this as a way to attack Marty.
The campuses have been totally taken over by the left and liberals. I’m glad the College kids and legislators in pierre are fighting back!
There’s a major scandal in the making at SDSU with there professor who is a leading Black Lives Matter activist who is always shutting down any conservative students. The coverup has been going on to long. I’m glad legislators are finally seeing how our tax money is spent on all the liberal indoctrination in colleges
You might want to worry less about… whatever it is you’re worried about, and spend more time focusing on English.
You might want to worry less about proper grammar and punctuation and more about your liberal brethren shutting down opposing views.
I would, but it’s more fun to call out hypocrisy and stupidity. If you’re going to try to call out SDSU professors for extremist views, yet you can’t spell beyond a third grade level, there’s either a complete failure of the educational system or you’re just blowing smoke.
It doesn’t take much of an education in the publik skool sistem to know hooo libral proffessers r and the damage they do to our youth.
Sure. If you’re an uneducated cretin.
Will you be running for office so you can rid the world of uneducated cretins? I know its difficult to tolerate the unwashed masses since you are such a highly educated person who wants to play grammar gestapo.
Purposely ignorant? You do you.
Ignorance can be corrected. Being a jerk, not so much.
The staff of the Board of Regents is running around the capital saying they are against free speech on campus! I’ve never seen anything like this. They are doing it on the taxpayer dime and they are attacking nice students like these College Republicans. I hope legislators look deeply into how our money is spent on campus. The Regents are digging their grave by fighting this bill
I know. They have been pushing really hard. However they have a few more bill to deal with now.
Keep up the good fight MC! It does not go unnoticed or unappreciated.
If Jackley isn’t for this campus bill there’s no way I’m voting for him. It’s easy to fight for free speech and fight against liberal control of our campuses. If Jackley won’t do it, then screw him. Vote Noem!!! At least she has guts to support this
Thanks MC! You’re a brave fighter for freedom. We’re proud of you. It’s too bad that the RINOs and bureaucrats at the Board of Regents are too gutless and spineless (and Jackley too) to fight for something this important. Keep at it!! And good point above–Noem just won my vote for standing up and backing this bill.
Now, will the College Republicans show some loyalty and endorse those candidates who are supporting them in their time of need?
As Novotny said, “South Dakota needs to be a state that promotes free speech everywhere, whether we agree with that speech or not.”
Right on! Three cheers for Emily
Why is Jackley selling out the college Republicans?
That’s some pretty serious spin.
Where do the college Democrats stand on this?
Ask the professors.
The professors don’t make the rules.
Wanna bet?
sure……….
Everyone knows that a state law can’t change the rights afforded by the Constitution, right? It’s the highest law of the land. An SDCL does not change the Constitution. I haven’t heard Jackley’s stance on this, but I have heard Noem’s. It’s apparent that she is unfamiliar with the Constitution.
Weird how bureacrats and legislators forget about the constitution when they pass rules and laws, huh?
Seriously, why won’t Jackley fight to pass this bill? He’s going to get bludgeoned in the primary if he takes these stances
I am trying to take a position on this but I can’t get a straight answer to some simple questions:
The US Constitution grants us the right to exercise free speech. There is nothing the legislature can do to enhance or detract from the right. Anybody who says otherwise is a liar or uninformed as the legislature is subordinate to the Constitution with regard to the Bill of Rights.
However, there are laws the legislature can pass which don’t affect the Right (they have no authority as described above) but encourage/accommodate or discourage/hinder the exercise.
Questions:
1) MC asserts this bill will encourage/accommodate/remove a hindrance to the excercise. In particular what is this particular problem?
2) Specifically, how does this bill address this problem?
3) Is there any downside?
Granted I haven’t asked MC directly (hopefully he will see this and respond) but I have asked two people who are for it (similar expressions as said above) and they just go off that they don’t want to have what is occurring on the Left Coast with regard to conservative speakers at campuses. But, again, they can’t answer my questions. Is my asking them too much to ask?
Hi Troy, I’ll take a swing at your questions:
With regard to the Legislature enhancing or detracting from Constitutional protections, the bill simply puts statutory protections on the freedom of speech the constitution calls for. It doesn’t try to add freedoms, it seeks to “encourage/accommodate” like you said.
Q 1) Most of the problems I know of in SD are found at USD. Currently, students are required to have any literature approved 2 days before handing it out, they need permission for any kind of demonstration or free-speech activity, and all such activities are restricted to a speech-zone. (Muenster University Center, I.D. Weeks Library, and connected courtyards) Clark and Stalzer could give you more examples of the need, but these are the primary ones I’m aware of.
Q 2) The bill defines all open areas of a public campus as a “public forum,” which means the students aren’t restricted to the current speech-zone, and don’t need permission to engage in speech. (Under 1073, the school still has the ability to maintain reasonable time/place/manner restrictions to prevent disruptive or dangerous actions on campus)
Q 3) I’m sure there will be downsides proposed in committee, but I’m not aware of any as the bill still allows for reasonable regulations by the university. (Not going to pretend that I’m unbiased or able to give a perfect answer)
Campuses in SD are, in general, still decent when it comes to this issue. (students at SDSU have told me that they haven’t had major issues on their campus) But there are enough examples of bad policies here in SD that show the sponsors of 1073 aren’t simply bringing the bill in response to what’s happening in other states.
Troy since about May/June – ish I have been hearing reports of students attempting to collect signatures on petitions being told to move to the ‘Free Speech Zone.’ away from the student foot traffic. Since I filed this bill, I have been given multiple examples of faculty covertly squashing what would be free speech. Some students have stated they have been afraid to come forward because they want to protect their grades, and very possibly their scholarship. Is there a problem on campuses or not, that is hard to say right now. Are these reports just rumors, or stories, or is there something to them? After watching the national stage, I don’t want what is happening in California or at Middlebury College to happen in South Dakota.
The First Amendment is not absolute. There is some speech that very illegal. For example, slander or directed threats. This bill has a unique provision in it; Students and faculty are to be informed of what is and what is not allowed. Demonstrators also can’t interfere with the function of the school itself. The school can also impose various restrictions, provided there is ample opportunity for other expression. For example you can’t put a sign on the front door, however you can use the bulletin board in the entryway.
This bill doesn’t make the campus a public free for all. Groups wanting to demonstrate need to invited by the faculty or by a student group. So bus loads of people just can’t show up and start demonstrating, or whatever.
Basically, this bill defines what is allowed as freedom of expression, before there is a lawsuit, and the courts define it for us.
Glad you are leading the fight Mr. Clark! Keep up the good work.
And who is in charge of state government? Maybe the Governor needs to warn them. Why do we need another law? Don’t we have the first amendment? Maybe the students need to file a complaint. Remember the Republicans are in control so you can’t blame the other party.
Troy–you might want to look up all the “speech codes” that have been passed on campuses that regulate speech. USD received a failing grade from national experts because of all their speech restrictions.
Who’s the new President?
Who’s the new President? This person could put an end to it. How about a student protest?
I was on SDSU campus until about a year ago and I can tell you that the liberal professors and diversity office control that campus and if you say anything non-liberal you are ostracized and condemned and shunned. It’s quite horrific. The campus I’m at not isn’t a lot better, but SDSU was terrible. Taxpayers will not like what they find out. I’m glad the legislature is no long burying their heads in the sand on this problem.
Perogi, it’s no different with state government.
Perogi, it’s no different with state government. Students and voters should not fear our government, government should fear us.
The diversity offices on campus spend millions a year and employ hundreds of people and all they do is police the campus for any conservative speech to attack and silence. It’s a terrible environment. Do you know any openly conservative professors on SD campuses? Do students hear a variety of viewpoints? No they don’t. The liberals control everything. I can’t believe people are too stupid to see this
The campuses here in the Black Hills definitely restrict free speech and one college president openly says he controls speech on campus in this new KOTA story from last night. If the worst thing that happens is that this law is “repetitive” as the Regents are telling all their lackeys to say then no harm is done! They are lying of course and want to continue to stifle an open marketplace of ideas on campus.
http://www.kotatv.com/content/news/Proposed–471382304.html
Sorry to be pedantic, but the first sentence of the press release conflicts with the headline. The headline says the CRs endorse the bill, but the first sentence says that *she* (Novotny), in her role as SDCR chair, endorses the bill. A clarification from Novotny (and perhaps other SDCR executive committee members) would be helpful.
Thank you Norman,
As you describe it, I see this as good. I have one major reservation. By making the entire campus a speech zone and soon to be illegal for spontaneous speech, can the university stop “spontaneous” speech when students are going to and from classes. My reading of the bill says no.
Frankly colleges are first and foremost a place where people pay to go to classes. I do not support this bill if it makes speech its most protected matter on campus to the detriment of going to and fro classes without speech which too often is loud, obnoxious, and heckling.
Can you clear up my concern? I support the concept I think is its primary motive.
In what way would bring exposed to speech inhibit one’s ability to walk?
Yes Troy, your concerns are addressed in section 4 of the bill. Students may engage freely “…as long as the person’s conduct does not materially and substantially disrupt the functioning of the institution…” Students are also not protected by 1073 to engage in Harassment, which the bill describes as an action that “…unreasonably interferes with a person’s access to educational opportunities or benefits…”
Does that answer your question?
“Illegal to restrict spontaneous speech”
MC and Norman,
Yep and thanks. Reading isn’t always clear to me.
Isn’t this already a constitutional right? …and we need a bill to ensure it? If free speech not being allowed then its the phony Republican’s ESTABLISHMENT’S doings over the last several years. THEY kowtow to the Board of Regent every whim every year….
Wow, I hate to say Lora has a point, but aren’t all of these regents appointed by GOP governors? If that’s the case, why the disconnect between the stated values of the governor and the public policy positions of his employees?
The regents themselves are on cloud 9 and don’t know any details. It’s the out of control staff and bureaucrats at the SDBOR who must be fired. We need a full investigation of all their politicking and left-wing antics. All they do is protect the liberals on campus and social justice warriors. It’s time to drain the swamp in Pierre and destroy the SDBOR as it now exists. I now believe we have to vote against Jackley because he is part of the permanent Pierre establishment that blocks all reform and covers up scandals.
Come on, Kristi’s been a Paul Ryan girl for years. How is she not establishment? I’d rather have someone from Pierre than from DC in the gov’s mansion.
Lora Hubbel She pretends to be behind Michael Clark’s free speech on campus bill – but voted for no free speech around federal buildings. PLUS MICHAEL CLARK works for the biggest offender of free speech on the web. Bully Blogger pp punches me online and then blocks me from defending myself..and THEY are bringing a “free speech” bill?
2
Manage
LikeShow more reactions · Reply · 10h