Rick Green, a Hartford Courant columnist and blogger, reports on his blog CTConfidential that “Rowdy students prevented New Canaan's Ann Coulter from speaking in Ottawa” Canada, and he added “That will stop her” in apparent approval.
Closer to home, UConn students successfully blocked Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton from speaking on campus.
Coulter said later that the Canadian university that scheduled her to speak was a second rate institution, and Boughton, who is running for governor on the Republican ticket this year, politely protested his exclusion from a law school panel before which he had been invited to speak. Boughten did not characterize UConn as a second rate college.
Canada, more or less patterned after European models, has no First Amendment rights. Mark Steyn, a Canadian writer much published here in the land of Jefferson and Madison, has had a tougher time of it in Canada, where a quasi governmental agency – the amusingly miss-named Canadian Human Rights Commission -- a couple of years ago subjected Steyn to a lengthy and costly investigation following a complaint received by the commission from the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC). The CIC objected to a magazine in Canada that printed excerpts from Steyn’s book “America Alone.”
In Connecticut, whenever assaults are made on First Amendments rights, the air is usually thick with recriminations: commentary articles in newspapers, marches and assemblies, editorial protests and other healthy effusions. But let a Connecticut native be hooted down in Canada or a candidate for governor in the state be pressured out of a speaking engagement by law school students at a tax supported university and you get – a silence so think you can mould it into a brick and throw it at the head of any target disserving of liberal displeasure.
Neither the Canadian brown shirts nor the UConn group was associated with Tea Party Patriots.
Closer to home, UConn students successfully blocked Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton from speaking on campus.
Coulter said later that the Canadian university that scheduled her to speak was a second rate institution, and Boughton, who is running for governor on the Republican ticket this year, politely protested his exclusion from a law school panel before which he had been invited to speak. Boughten did not characterize UConn as a second rate college.
Canada, more or less patterned after European models, has no First Amendment rights. Mark Steyn, a Canadian writer much published here in the land of Jefferson and Madison, has had a tougher time of it in Canada, where a quasi governmental agency – the amusingly miss-named Canadian Human Rights Commission -- a couple of years ago subjected Steyn to a lengthy and costly investigation following a complaint received by the commission from the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC). The CIC objected to a magazine in Canada that printed excerpts from Steyn’s book “America Alone.”
In Connecticut, whenever assaults are made on First Amendments rights, the air is usually thick with recriminations: commentary articles in newspapers, marches and assemblies, editorial protests and other healthy effusions. But let a Connecticut native be hooted down in Canada or a candidate for governor in the state be pressured out of a speaking engagement by law school students at a tax supported university and you get – a silence so think you can mould it into a brick and throw it at the head of any target disserving of liberal displeasure.
Neither the Canadian brown shirts nor the UConn group was associated with Tea Party Patriots.
Comments
People who threaten other with bodily harm should be prosecuted. There are no enforceable sanctions for law students who violate the constitutional rights of speakers in this way other then public obloquy. So, where is it?
When a school sought to punish Avery Doninger for exercising her First Amendment right, there was a great hue and outcry. I was part of it: http://donpesci.blogspot.com/2009/01/courts-have-often-recognized-that-first.html
So, show me the outrage.
First, it is unfair for you to blanketly refer to "UConn students" in your post. It was actually a relatively small student group for latino students who, exercising their on first amendment rights, said they did not feel Mr. Boughton should be given a forum to speak. It is unfair for you to suggest that this group's views are in any way representative of UConn law students as a whole.
Second, Mr. Boughton was invited to speak at a symposium that was being hosted by the Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal. This is a scholarly journal that publishes articles on a number of topics and they are holding a symposium on undocumented workers and illegal immigrants. It is to their credit that they sought a variety of viewpoints and therefore asked Mr. Boughton, a conservative, to speak.
Thid, and most importantly as you insinuate otherwise in your above comment, the invitation WAS NOT rescinded. Here's what the editor in chief, Pat Linsey, had to say to Rick Green:
"We stand by our decision to invite him. We think he would have had a contribution to make. We are disappointed that he pulled out. The vast majority of law students, wherever they stand on the issue, would be open to what he has to say."
Kudos to Mr. Linsey for having the integrity to withstand the close minded efforts of the latino students. Rather than the all out assault on free speech that you see this as, I think it is an example of free speech working rather well. The latino students expressed a viewpoint. CPILJ rejected that viewpoint. Mr. Boughton has exercised his right to free speech by choosing, well, to not make any speech at all.
I think that Mr. Boughton is being a bit of a baby here. I have been to many law school symposiums. They are generally extremely respectful, and there is always a Q & A with panelists. It is a shame that rather than attend, as planned, and address whatever criticisms members of the law school community may have had head on, Mr. Boughton took the cowardly route and cut and ran.
Personally, I think the more interesting story here is what this says about Mr. Boughton's character. Yes, what the latino students said was unfair and closeminded. But as governor, you do not always deal with friendly factions. Do we really want an eggshell politician like Mr. Boughton in the governor's office? I doubt the state can afford the extra kleenex.
Boughten simply got the message the protesting students were sending him and probably decided not to embarrass either himself or them.
The culture at these colleges will remain hostile and brutally uncivil unless the administration applies sanctions.
And wow Don. You said: "UConn should be held responsible for this."
What sanctions would you suggest be imposed? The Latino Law Association exercised their first amendment rights by expressing an opinion (albeit a close-minded and wrongheaded opinion). But let's not forget who the government actor is here: The law school. Had the school leveled sanctions against the Latino student organization, the school would almost undoubtedly have been violating THEIR first amendment rights.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, The Friends of Voltaire