• SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    3 days ago

    … in violation of Harvard’s First Amendment rights.

    Harvard isn’t a person. This is a bullshit decree, but let’s not try to defend it with additional bullshit.

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Harvard isn’t a person.

      According to Citizens United it doesn’t matter. Part of that ruling held that both individuals and associations of individuals have a free-speech rights. Or to put it another way, you as a person have a right to free speech, and the right doesn’t go away just because you choose to associate with other persons.

      So Harvard has a right to free speech, because the individuals who make up “Harvard” have that right.

    • MrEff@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      While I understand the resentment of saying an institution is a person, and I agree- they still have constitutional rights. To say that private institutions don’t have a right to free speech is the same as saying that the government is allowed to dictate what companies can and can’t say. Authoritarians would love for you to push that idea.

      Under your same thinking (Harvard isn’t a person and has no right to a first amendment? OK): Then Harvard resisting against the trump administration is illegal and we find it treasonous to be funneling in possible spies from adversarial countries under the guise of education. We need to lock up anyine who works at any higher ed institution unless they can swear loyalty to America (trump) because they might be complicit in this spy ring. And don’t forget, the universities can be searched at any time for evidence and assumed guilty without trial because they aren’t a person and don’t have constitutional rights! Can we charge the university entity with state laws or federal laws? Both! They don’t have rights to protect against double jeopardy!