Archived version

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/30989415

Texas lawmakers trying to muzzle campus protests have just passed one of the most ridiculous anti-speech laws in the country. If signed by Gov. Greg Abbott, Senate Bill 2972 would ban speech at night — from study groups to newspaper reporting — at public universities in the state.

Ironically, the bill builds on a previous law passed in 2019 meant to enshrine free speech on Texas campuses. But now, lawmakers want to crack down on college students’ pro-Palestinian protests so badly that they literally passed a prohibition on talking.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    150
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    SB 2972 would require public universities in Texas to adopt policies prohibiting “engaging in expressive activities on campus between the hours of 10 p.m. and 8 a.m.” Expressive activity includes “any speech or expressive conduct” protected by the First Amendment or Texas Constitution.

    Let’s do the same thing with the second amendment and see how that goes over in Texas. “You have the right to bear arms, but not when you should be in bed…”

    • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      93
      ·
      20 days ago

      How does a law explicitly interfering with first amendment rights not get immediately struck down as unconstitutional? Limiting free speech is not even an unintended theoretical side effect of the bill; it’s the expressed purpose.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        53
        ·
        20 days ago

        It still has to be passed before it can make it’s way through the courts to strike it down. And then it depends on the clearly partisan judges in Texas.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        20 days ago

        The funny thing is, it was not explicitly clear at the time of the founding whether things like the First Amendment applied to States at all. After all, the Constitution applied to the Federal Government, and States had their own government…

        … Until after the Civil War, when the 14th amendment was ratified. You might be familiar with the 14th Amendment as it is the one that guarantees birthright citizenship. Well, that’s just it’s first sentence. The second sentence also guarantees all citizens the rights enumerated in the Constitution, making it clear that the States cannot abridge those rights.

        But right now, the plain language of the 14th Amendment is under attack by Conservatives who claim that it all of a sudden does not cover people born here whose parents are not citizens. So as long as today’s Conservatives will ignore one part of the 14th Amendment, why not ignore the rest and hope a captured SCOTUS makes it all hunky-dory after the fact!

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          20 days ago

          If that part of the 14th doesn’t apply, then logically none of the people in the former Confederate states are US Citizens.

          Pretty sure they don’t want that.

          • dhork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            20 days ago

            Oh they’ll figure out some tortured logic to make sure they get the outcome they want while screwing over people they hate.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        Just to be clear, limiting free speech is already allowed to a degree. The Supreme Court has long ruled that it’s legal to constrain the right to expression based on time, manner, and place restrictions, so long as those restrictions are content neutral, serve a legitimate public need, and are minimally restrictive to serve that need.

        This law absolutely does not qualify. I’m sure they will argue it served some bullshit need to prevent disruption to campus activities, issues with policing, public safety, etc. But there is no chance that restricting all 1st amendment expression on a college campus for nearly 12 hours a day serves any legitimate public need in the least restrictive manner to serve that need. It will certainly be struck down as unconstitutional by a sensible judge somewhere along the way.

        But the problem is that this law is not the goal. They want a judge to strike it down. That is the actual goal. That is why they keep passing such blatantly unconstitutional laws in red states pertaining to religion, free speech, lgbt rights, etc. They are doing it for 2 reasons A) They are trying to make the legitimate acts of the judicial branch out to be some sort of overreach on the will of Trump and conservative states to help remove stopgaps that they can’t control from their way entirely. That’s what the SCOTUS’ ruling against national injunctions for lower federal courts was meant to hinder. And B) when it does get ruled against, they just have to keep appealing until they get to the Supreme Court and let the right wing nuts redefine our 1st amendment rights to suit their desires for the entire country, not just Texas. Even if this particular law doesn’t survive their decision, again, that was never the point. You can bet your ass that even in striking the specific law down, they will set new precedent with the case that will fundamentally weaken free speech rights for all of us. It will make it easier to implement draconian laws like this on a national scale.

    • fartographer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      Shooting someone communicates hatred, fear, or self-defense, so it’ll be banned by default. Sometimes we’ll use gunshots for Morse code here

  • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 days ago

    " a similar policy at Indiana University that required prior approval for protests on campus occurring between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m"

    Kinda off topic but I think we need a different word for this kind of “protest”. If you’re gathering at a place chosen by the people you’re protesting against, at a time chosen by the people you’re protesting against, you aren’t protesting. You’re having a protest-roleplaying picnic

  • Evil Edgelord@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    20 days ago

    Okaaaay…we’ll just do it in the daytime, where more people can witness it and more people can join us ✌️😂

    GOP Congressmen are weak, ineffectual, inverse virtue signalers. We can’t let them just hang around like the Confederates did after the Civil War, which is a big part of why we’re back here again.

    • cjoll4@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      Inverse virtue signalers? Does that mean they’re “vice signalers,” or…?

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 days ago

    I’d say that this is such a clear violation of the 1st amendment that it would be struck down quicker than Trump on a PDF File candidate but with all things given…

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    20 days ago

    How do they expect people to get a degree if you cant stay up all night in a lab bashing 3 heads at a problem?

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    19 days ago

    Update: This article was published on June 5. Since then, Gov. Greg Abbott has signed Senate Bill 2972 into law. It will take effect Sept. 1.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        19 days ago

        Yeah, I saw it on the update they put in the post when I pulled it up on archive to get passed the subscription requirement. It’s crazy that anyone could think a law like that should pass anywhere.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          19 days ago

          Crazy is the word, yeah. If anybody tells you that zionism and MAGA aren’t cults, you can point to this as a stellar example of how the programming has melted away any resemblance of sanity.

  • lmdnw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    20 days ago

    Texans should exercise their second amendment in order to protect their first. Kill traitors to the Constitution.

  • dan1101@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    20 days ago

    Free speech hours, what the actual fuck? Are the GOP alien lizards that need quiet time at night?

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    19 days ago

    zionism is just flatly incompatible with American free speech. There will be a backlash to this overreach and I wouldnt want to be a zionist when it happens.