In sum, the University of Colorado's improper investigation has reached the substantively correct result. Churchill's speech was constitutionally protected, and all other credible misconduct allegations should be referred to the appropriate governing body for review. This conclusion is so startlingly obvious that it is difficult to imagine that an "investigation" was needed to reach these determinations. Even in hindsight, this investigation appears to be little more than a constitutionally dangerous method of temporarily calming a public storm.(Via The Torch.) View concurring opinions here.
It is simply undeniable that Churchill's speech has aroused deep anger across the country. Yet that anger - by itself - does not provide a basis for defying the First Amendment.
28.3.05
DO IT BY THE BOOK. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education evaluates Colorado's investigation of Ward Churchill.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

No comments:
Post a Comment