Quote:
Originally posted by lauradav
MysticCat81 is on the money on the free speech issues. I spent three years in law school, and have taken Constitutional Law, Con Law II (1st Amendment) and passed the bar exam. Moreover, I had Erwin Chemerinsky (one of the nation's foremost experts on Con Law) as my Con Law II professor. It would be a HUGE stretch to argue that the 1st Amendment applies in this situation.
|
Chemerinsky Rocks! Lauradav, you are so lucky to have him as your professor. (Wish I could of had Freer for Civ. pro., but whatever..) I used his supplement to study my con. law class, so clear and easy to follow. Definitely recommend his book for anyone else who may take the course. (Ok, enough law school talk, nobody around here really cares
Not that anyone else needs backing up at this point, but I also took free speech / mass media law and the first amendment is directed towards the government. If you are in a private organization or group, your rules do not have to follow the constitution. Notice that every org has there own by-laws and constitution?
My problem is, since it's not coming from your nationals, this is a rule being done outside your bylaws and consitution, and as much as you think signing an agreement would make it voluntary and legally clear, it doesn't. This censorship agreement has no valid purpose in my mind. And since the pan-hell is under the umbrella of the school, i'm sure you could pierce that corporate veil of the university and accuse them of violating your symbolic speech rights. Going that route is a sticky situation and besides my point.
I just don't like rules that serve no reasonable purpose. And this one is a waste of time to me.