Monday, June 24, 2019
#FREESPEECH IN THE NEWS: June 24, 2019
As the Citadel of Free Speech here in Cleveland, we work to protect and promote the basis of our democracy by sharing related stories, commentary, and opinions on free speech in the 21st century. Here's what's making the news – and what you should know about – in the past week.
1.) Animal rights activists win free speech ruling over Vallejo’s Six Flags protests
Animal rights activists can hold protests in the parking lot and walkways outside Six Flags Discovery Kingdom in Vallejo, an area that is private property but also a “public forum for expressive activity” under California law, a state appeals court has ruled.
The decision Thursday by the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco overturned a ruling by a Solano County judge allowing the park’s owners to prohibit protests on its property outside Six Flags. In contrast to the U.S. Constitution, which protects free speech only in public areas, the ruling highlighted California’s broader protections, as declared by the state Supreme Court in 1979 when it allowed signature-gathering outside the Pruneyard shopping mall in Campbell.
The grounds immediately outside the Vallejo park are “large and freely open to the public,” Justice Therese Stewart said in the appeals court’s 3-0 ruling. “A small group of people peacefully handing out leaflets and displaying posters there is not likely to interfere with the property’s use.”
Faced with a free speech issue concerning a clothing line called FUCT, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down federal prohibitions against granting trademark protection for "immoral" or "scandalous" material as unconstitutional. The vote was 6-3 in an opinion written by Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
"The First Amendment does not allow the government to penalize views just because many people, whether rightly or wrongly, see them as offensive," Kagan said from the bench in announcing the decision.
The three dissenters agreed that "immoral" covers too broad an array of potential trademarks but said the ban on "scandalous" trademarks should stand.
3.) Oberlin verdict could have 'chilling effect' on college free-speech policies
Earlier this month, a jury found Oberlin College guilty of libel and other charges rooted in a student protest. If the verdict stands, its impact could spread far beyond Oberlin.
The case started back in 2016, when an Oberlin student, who is black, was accused of shoplifting from Gibson's Bakery. An altercation involving the student and an employee followed. Students protested the bakery, alleging a pattern of racist behavior, and the college briefly stopped using the bakery as a vendor.
Although the student, along with other students involved in the incident, ultimately took a plea, the bakery filed a case against the college and its vice president and dean of students in November 2017, alleging libel and interference with business, as well as emotional distress.
