Texas Lawmakers Walk Back Campus Free Speech Law Because It’s Letting Too Many Pro-Palestinian Students Protest
from the party-of-free-speech-strikes-again dept
It would be too kind to say the irony is lost on Republican lawmakers. They would have to be capable of comprehending and acknowledging their own hypocrisy to even begin to recognize the irony. That’s why these lawmakers are so unconcerned with the long-term destruction they’re causing. It’s all worth it if it results in short-term success. And besides, they’re not the ones who are going to have to deal with the fallout.
But every so often, the tides turn fast enough even these sorts of lawmakers are getting caught up in the messes they’ve made. That’s how it’s going in Texas right now, as Republican lawmakers seek to undo campus free speech protections enacted a half-decade ago because it’s allowing people they don’t like to express ideas they don’t like.
Here’s how it started, as reported by the Texas Tribune:
In 2019, the Legislature passed a law requiring colleges and universities to ensure that all outdoor common areas of campus can be used to stage a protest, as long as demonstrators don’t break the law or disrupt school activities.
That measure came after Texas A&M leaders canceled a white nationalist rally and Texas Southern University scrapped a planned speech by Rep. Briscoe Cain, R-Deer Park. Both happened in 2017. Texas A&M said it canceled the event due to safety concerns while TSU said it canceled Cain’s speech because it was organized by an unregistered student group.
“Our college students, our future leaders, they should be exposed to all ideas, I don’t care how liberal they are or how conservative they are,” Sen. Joan Huffman said at the time.
Some of these same lawmakers are now involved in an effort to create more speech restrictions on campus because students failed to comprehend the 2019 law was only there to ensure the presence of white nationalist rallies on Texas university campuses. Now that these expanded protections are being enjoyed by non-white nationalists, it’s time for a change.
Senate Bill 2972, which passed 97-39 in a final House vote on Wednesday, would give university systems’ governing boards the power to limit where protests can take place on campus.
Republicans who support say it will prevent disruption and unsafe behavior seen during the pro-Palestinian demonstrations last year. Critics say the measure contradicts previous conservative efforts to protect free speech rights on Texas campuses and is unconstitutional.
As is almost always the case when Republicans start re-writing laws they previously enacted, it’s the Republicans who are wrong and the critics who are right. Of the two groups, the critics are, at least, more consistent in their views.
There’s more to the law than simply expanding the amount of viewpoint censorship publicly-funded schools can engage in. In addition to giving universities more discretion on time/place decisions, students would be forbidden from using amplification devices (including microphones) when protesting during class hours, erecting overnight encampments, taking down a university’s “U.S. flag to put up another nation’s or organization’s banner,” wearing disguises (which really just means wearing masks of any kind, including the COVID-prevention variety), and protesting within 300 feet of any residences overnight.
This was never a problem between 2019 and this year, even though none of the proposed restrictions were in place since the law was first passed for the sole purpose of forcing public universities to host far-right speakers and white nationalist rallies. But with pro-Palestine protests taking over college campuses, it’s time for a change. Fewer rights for everyone — something that may result in fewer white nationalist rallies but a hit white nationalists are likely to take because it means people they don’t like won’t be able to protest either.
Even if you ignore the blatant hypocrisy of rolling back protections just because they’re capable of protecting students Texas Republicans don’t like, there’s also the sheer stupidity of what will likely become the finished work product sent to the governor’s desk. Here’s FIRE attorney Tyler Coward pointing out some obvious problems with the current proposal:
“Under this bill, the university would be required to ask a student to take off a MAGA hat if they were wearing it at 10:15 p.m. or a Bernie Sanders shirt because that is political, that is expressive activity,” he said.
Meanwhile, true believers like Senator Huffman will continue to pretend her party isn’t selling out its white nationalist voting bloc with this ham-handed attempt to silence pro-Palestinian protesters.
Huffman, a Houston Republican who authored that 2019 law, voted earlier this month in favor of the new limits on protests, citing similar reasons mentioned by other supporters. She said the new measure doesn’t undermine the former one.
Oh, but it does. It rolls back protections and makes it that much easier for universities to block appearances and rallies by bigots the Republic Party approves of. This attempt to only harm the protesters Huffman doesn’t like while protecting those she does like means the law won’t protect anyone and will make universities less likely to allow protests, rallies, and public appearances of any kind because nearly any cause could be considered to be “political” enough it’s just going to create a bunch of extra enforcement work for schools and their local security/police forces.
Filed Under: campus speech, free speech, gop, hypocrisy, palestine, protests, texas


Comments on “Texas Lawmakers Walk Back Campus Free Speech Law Because It’s Letting Too Many Pro-Palestinian Students Protest”
What?! It’s almost like their view this entire time on free speech is so they can can minorities and women slurs.
'You have the right to say you agree with me and nothing more.'
Republicans just cannot help but remind people on the regular that when they claim to be champions and defenders of free speech they only mean speech that they agree with.
Turns out conservatism was actually just narcissistic hypocrisy this whole time.
Variation on an Old Joke
Under Democrats, we have free speech. I can stand in the middle of a courtyard at UCLA and shout “Fuck Joe Biden” without getting in trouble. Under the GOP, we also have free speech. I can stand in the middle of a courtyard at Texas A&M and shout “Fuck Joe Biden” without getting in trouble.
Re:
In neither case, though, can the local news media broadcast your statement via the public airwaves. The government requires them to censor it, and somehow that’s considered legal.
Re: Re:
The government retains the right to regulate what airs on public airwaves. Might seem like a shit deal, but it is what it is.
Re: Re: Re:
Well, no, they laid claim to that right. Which, even if we ignore the First Amendment, the Tenth says would be retained by the States, or the people.
By the same logic, the Feds could claim a right to censor anything that runs across the Internet (interstate commerce!), the Interstate highway system, or the postal system. Or, to pick an example that’s especially relevant today, libraries that receive any federal funding.
Somehow, people are easily convinced that new things are more dangerous than old. Movies and television were somehow more dangerous than books, video games are more dangerous still, and then there’s TikTok. Sometimes, courts fall for it, and then we’ve got serious newscasters using language like “the knights who say a word starting with N”, like a bunch of damn infants.
Re: Re: Re: Airwaves
Hi, former radio guy here; (Normally) The FCC does NOT regulate content or programming. With Brendan Carr and his sucking up to Trump, that’s all being tested at KCBS and NPR. I don’t see Carr getting anywhere. None of his witch hunts are going to pass Constitutional muster. His claims of “bias” are going to be challenged by some pretty stiff federal judges.
There has NEVER been a single instance of a radio station EVER losing their license over programming (this includes swear words.) That is a long debunked urban myth.
The FCC CAN hit a station with fines. But those are only issued after a hearing. And most of the time, the complainer is a single religious busybody looking to pick a fight. Most of those cases are dismissed and/or fines reduced.
The FCC HAS revoked licenses for many things to list here. But the usual trouble is bad contests, not keeping the public file up to date, filing a Special Temporary Authority to temporarily take a station off the air….And missing the STA deadline to return to the air. Missing EAS tests, owner becomes a convicted felon, failure to maintain transmitter sites. Failure to pay FCC fees. All that. But never over programming/content. Their concerns-at least on paper, seem to be technical, maintenance and character (fitness to possess a license.) Although I would argue there are a few individual owners I personally know and a few corporates who shouldn’t even be given a Mr. Microphone.
Re: Re: Re:2
So? “Mostly” having free speech, or having cheap speech, maybe only at certain times of day, isn’t what the law says. Why should “losing a license” be the only result considered bad? People don’t get fined for doing legal things, and speech is never supposed to be illegal.
Broadcasters are convinced the government bans them from airing certain things; here’s a picture of one studio sign about this. When reporting on other people saying certain words, they’ll go out of their way to avoid using the words, sometimes leaving their audiences guessing. Saying that protesters expressed negative sentiments about Joe Biden is no substitute for showing a crowd with “Fuck Joe Biden” signs; those words would have been chosen for impact, and the government would have effectively censored them, whatever the technicalities are.
This extends way beyond “seven dirty words”, too. Broadcasters had historically been scared of getting in trouble for showing content relating to homosexual relationships, for example, which has probably influenced social views regarding the topic.
Re:
But why do that when you can say “let’s go Brandon” and pretend you’re getting away with something?
Texas: We believe in free speech!
Sudents: Free Palestine!
Texas: Not that free speech!
In addition to giving universities more discretion on time/place decisions, read: Administrtors can be more easily coerced by Republican behind closed doors than thousands of students in the open, so universities should be doing our repression and coercion for us. Unless we also feel like grandstanding at the time.
Of course they did..
If they didn’t change things, they would be in violation of Wilhoit’s Law, they would they be protecting the outclass of Pro-Palestinian Protestors.
That will not do.
Obviously the new restrictions won’t be enforced upon Nazis.
One of many reasons it’s time to stop letting universities have their own police departments.