Im sure trump will just illegally modify the White House website to let people know where the mercy is being sold now so he can keep the grift going.

This isn't the case in California.

Here, instead of in-state tuition, we have student fees. These fees are voted on by the student body and collected by the Associated Students (AS, the student governments). The ASs are mandated legal entities separate from the college administrations. Student fees are allocated by the ASs for extra curricular activities (like school clubs), and extra curricular infrastructure (like the UCB Student Union building where I gather the book selling event was to be held). The ASs, being government under the 1stA, and under California's more expansive speech rights, cannot legally pick-n-choose by speech content what speakers their sponsored clubs invite. It's also not the UC admins call at all.

Cliffs: the Cal Berkeley AS Young Republicans Club most certainly can invite neo-fascists to sell their books on campus.

^^^Again, I'm saying if that is the case(no idea if its true) that its a stupid way to run a university. Its simply has nothing to do with free speech (like concern trolls claim) for public universities to act more like private ones in thus respect.

Your point, if I may, is that "free speech" doesn't mean you're guaranteed a nice comfy room with display lighting for your books, and places to plug in your e-commerce gear.

It's an only in Cali thing I'm sure, but major private universities have the same conundrum. If Stanford has a Young Republicans Club, they can surely invite neo-fascist book sellers too.

I can certainly accept that the state of California doesn't know what its doing! I've come moderately close to moving there 3 times (undergrad, grad and first job) and always felt something was off.

That's fine, of course. Goodness knows we've had enough eastern staters moving here. Us Californians like things our way. We enjoy broader speech rights than the federal 1stA. Most relevant to college campuses is the Leonard Law...

Well, at the very least you enjoy telling people about your greater free speech rights before acting like any other state. And really, what can be more California than that?

No, true story, we do enjoy broader speech rights. You can wander around any open air mall and petition the government of grievances in Cali, try that somewhere else.

Well sure, I guess. Although I'm not sure how you'd know.

But anyways, I was explaining why UC can't act like an out of state private university.

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1spjclp

Action Items 2/3/2017
Vote NO on Jeff Sessions for Attorney General.
Vote NO on Betsy Devos for Sec. of Education.
Filibuster Gorsuch for Supreme court.
Vote NO on any kind of wall.
Vote NO on repealing or dismantling Obamacare (ACA).
Ask if they've come out against the Muslim Ban (aka Travel Ban but really Muslim Ban). Tell them you are organizing with other voters in [state] for religious liberty and against Muslim Ban.

http://www.contactsenators.com/

You nonsensically talking about it here.

I think it is more complicated than that. Universities plausibly have as part of their mission an ideal of free inquiry. This is why academic freedom applies to universities but not companies. Thus, their reasons for adopting a rule like California's go beyond just the typical free speech considerations.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...nterior-united

Sure, but a university not fulfilling\reinterpreting its mission statement shouldn't usually be of federal concern.

I also strongly disagree with "academic freedom" interpreted in this way. Academic freedom is something to protect full faculty members from being silenced by society, government or the administration, they are actual academics who have earned the right not to be fired for unpopular views. Undergrads aren't academics and haven't earned the same right to consequence free speech.....they should go home and get their shine box.

Thomas Jefferson, he ain't....

And by all mean, petition your elected representatives as often as you please.... just don't get your hopes up too much. Disappointment is a terrible thing to deal with as you kids have been exhibiting for the past few weeks. You know, participation trophies aren't given out in politics.

Fair enough.

We're not really talking about academic freedom in the sense of teaching, publishing or researching.

In general, any university's mandate goes beyond that shiz, to stuff like creating a rich and diverse extracurricular experience. That is usually going to include things like athletics, cultural events, art, and student clubs. The rub is, in the US, if a public school sponsors or facilitates any advocacy clubs, they can't pick-n-choose based on content... without running afoul of the 1stA.

When the time comes, just how much will you be willing to sacrifice for authoritarian rule?

que?

Where I'm from, the last thing you want to do is tell Senators to support "religious liberty", given the leaked EO text floating around.

I guess just say you're against the Muslim Ban/Travel Ban. If they try to say it's not a Muslim Ban, well it targets only Muslim-majority countries and there are exceptions carved out specifically for Christians.

They are for religious liberty when it's for them and against religious liberty when it's applied to everybody. We need to keep calling them out.

Agree completely.

I agree that academic freedom should be understood in the way you describe here. However, academic freedom is only one manifestation of a broader ideal of free inquiry that academic institutions should take as a primary value. Valuing free inquiry, and teaching undergraduates to value it as well, means giving some level of responsibility to student groups for participation in academic life. I wouldn't give them as much freedom as faculty, but I would be willing to extend them a right to invite whom they want to speak at campus. Sometimes they'll make mistakes, invite people they later regret, but that is why you give people responsibility, it forces them to learn from what they're doing.

Yes, but I'm providing a broader argument for letting student groups choose their speakers, one that applies to private as well as public universities.

This largely sums up why I think faculty and the administration should be able to overrule students. Students really can't take "responsibility" for stuff like this. Its the administration that's responsible for security, making statements to the media, making it clear to everybody that the speaker goes directly against the values of the university etc. Nobody in the real world or academia has this sort of consequence free power so I don't see the educational value of giving it to students.

Oh look, Milo is openly calling for ethnic cleansing, but please, tell me more about how I should be upset that people broke some windows.

Inviting internet trolls isn't exactly signs of students wanting to accept responsibility. You're talking about the age range where activities vary from drunken stupors to procrastinating until the last moment to type papers. And people who may have not learned what is proper discourse.