UCLA Law threatens Federalist Society, applies double standards to protestors and gets schooled about the First Amendment from F.I.R.E.

In the last 24 hours, UCLA Law has made headlines. The coverage has been on Fox News, New York Post, Wall Street Journal, Jonathan Turley but all that coverage is summary and opinion from a letter sent by F.I.R.E. Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression. No one published the actual letter. Fox News has emails they did not publish but they did get this response. "We are committed to upholding the First Amendment. We have received the letter and plan to respond," a spokesperson for UCLA School of Law told Fox News.

No one published the actual letter. Fox News has emails they did not publish but they did get this response. "We are committed to upholding the First Amendment. We have received the letter and plan to respond," a spokesperson for UCLA School of Law told Fox News

This is the problem with woke California and double standards. This will go over the head of Rick Toledo, his supporters and others in Humboldt and California who think they can act out, protest do whatever they want with no consequences. They are for free speech only if it agrees with their liberal, biased opinions. Rights are not selective; neither is the constitution.

This is the entire F.I.R.E. letter.

Some key statements from the F.I.R.E. letter:

"Dear Dean Waterstone:

FIRE, a nonpartisan nonprofit that defends free speech, is concerned by Assistant Dean for Student Affairs Bayrex Martí’s email warning the Federalist Society of potential disciplinary proceedings should it or its members publicly identify individuals seen in video clips disrupting the group’s recent event featuring the general counsel of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Publishing truthful information, including the names of individuals depicted in viral video clips, is protected by the First Amendment. We urge UCLA to clarify to the Federalist Society and its members that they will not be subject to university investigation or disciplinary proceedings for any protected publication of truthful information. 

Dean Martí’s warning to the Federalist Society raises constitutional concerns. The First Amendment protects the right of private individuals and groups to publish truthfulinformation, including the names of other private individuals depicted in publicly available videos, from both prior restraint and punishment. Students and other audience members attending the April 21 event had no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding their attendance or conduct at the event. As is abundantly clear from the posted videos, the event was held in a large university lecture hall with a large audience of students and faculty present, any of whom could report publicly what occurred in the room. Furthermore, the Federalist Society notified attendees prior to the event that it would be recorded, meaning that attendees had every expectation that their presence and behavior would be easily ascertained by people not personally in attendance.

As painful as online criticism may be at times, UCLA may not restrict protected speech merely to shield student protesters from the consequences of their actions, including criticism by students, faculty, or the broader community. 

Criticism is a form of “more speech,” the remedy to offensive expression that the First Amendment prefers to censorship. If UCLA students are subjected to hostile, unprotected behavior that violates UCLA policies, the proper remedy for such behavior is to discipline those who engage in it when and if it occurs—not to restrict truthful speech that UCLA administrators “foresee” may be a problem.

"Moreover, Dean Martí’s written warning to the Federalist Society of potential disciplinary action for publishing legally obtained, truthful information about students who disrupted the April 21 event—while issuing no similar warning to student protesters who have publicly identified (and strongly criticized) Federalist Society members visible in the video clips—suggests selective concern for students facing public criticism based on students’ viewpoints."