University of Alabama expels student over racist social media tirade
Source: The Hill
BY AVERY ANAPOL - 01/19/18 12:22 PM EST
The University of Alabama has reportedly expelled a 19-year-old student after she posted racist videos on social media.
Harley Barber was expelled from her sorority and the university after the school investigated two videos that she posted on her finsta, or fake Instagram account, one of which was posted on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
In one video, Barber uses the n-word in a rant after turning off a running faucet.
We do not waste water, she said in the video. We dont waste water because of people in Syria. I love how I act like I love black people because I f---ing hate n-----s. So, thats really interesting I f---ing hate n-----s, but I just saved the f---ing n-----s by shutting that water off.
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/369742-university-of-alabama-expels-student-over-racist-social-media-tirade
elias7
(4,026 posts)it's OK to be racist; you just can't state your beliefs out loud.
djg21
(1,803 posts)As reprehensible as her comments were, the University of Alabama is a state school, and state schools are subject to the 1st Amendment, which is applicable to the States via the 14th Amendment. The sorority is a private club and could expel her without regard to her free speech rights, but I dont see how a state school can lawfully expel her on account of her speech alone, irrespective of how much she deserves it. Some right-wing advocacy group is going to glom on to this matter and commence a lawsuit on this womans behalf.
Cold War Spook
(1,279 posts)if they believe that her constitutional rights were infringed upon.
rockfordfile
(8,704 posts)And being 19 is no excuse.
djg21
(1,803 posts)The fact that shes a racist dumbfuck doesnt mean she can be retaliated for exercising her speech, no matter how deplorable her speech was.
jl_theprofessor
(95 posts)The school also likely has a code of conduct.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts).. don't ask me how I know.
Some precedents hold that student codes of conduct are acceptable in order to maintain a good sense of order and discipline. In the same way, Federal employees couldn't behave this way.
But there is some contrary case law, so there ya go.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)This broke two days ago.
Judi Lynn
(160,621 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)Some one in deep do-do for expelling a "model" alabama student
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)Don't offend members of this community who were born in Alabama, presently live in Alabama, or like me, grew up in Alabama.
Racism is spread nationwide, and although Alabama has more than its share, it is no more the "home" of racists than is any other state.
Mosby
(16,350 posts)Nitram
(22,877 posts)Sounds like you may have a bit of bias of your own...
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)For the umpteenth time:
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)melm00se
(4,994 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 19, 2018, 03:50 PM - Edit history (1)
Matal v. Tam - Newspaper article
Decision
Alito wrote for 4 justices:
"[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend
strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express the thought that we hate."
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote separately, also for four justices, but on this point the opinions agreed:
"A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an egregious form of content discrimination, which is presumptively unconstitutional.
A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the governments benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society."
a 9-0 Supreme Court ruling trumps your viewpoint.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)Anyone who has seen The Blues Brothers knows that the ACLU went to bat for the Nazis and argued in favor of their right to march in Skokie, Illinois. The ACLU lost a few members over that.
I'm not going to cite "The Blues Brothers" as case law, but the actual case is a high school civics textbook example of what the First Amendment is about.
Thanks again.
IANAL. Pay the $2.
Back to you, stonecutter357.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)She spoke her mind and her sorority and University expressed their disapproval of what she said by expelling her...
Free speech has consequences...
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)In what way is expelling her for her words not a restriction?
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)(for her) consequence of her use of her first amendment rights.
It's just that simple...
hatrack
(59,592 posts)"Congress shall make no law . . . "
No law was enforced to restrict her freedom to be a dumbass, and no law ever will be (assuming the 1st holds up, of course).
djg21
(1,803 posts)Via the 14th Amendment. This is not subject to debate. You are wrong.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)melm00se
(4,994 posts)the University of Alabama is a public (governmental) institution thus a state actor thus strictly bound by the 1st Amendment.
Didn't you have a civics class in school?
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)rules that she agreed to when she enrolled at U of A.
When she exercised her right to free speech, her words violated that code and so she was expelled.
Apparently you had a lousy civics teacher or you were a bad student... I suggest that YOU go back to school!
melm00se
(4,994 posts)has a couple of issues:
1) it is in conflict with this:
2) it was used as de facto punishment mechanism for protected speech.
But of course, far too many people only assert rights when they agree with the message, the second they disagree with the message, the right to freedom of expression goes right out the window.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)When she enrolled at U of A!
So she's gone! I feel really badly for her...
[img][/img]
I'm done with this... Have a nice evening!
djg21
(1,803 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 19, 2018, 04:50 PM - Edit history (1)
No matter how reprehensible speech may be, it still is protected. Maybe youre too young to remember the Nazi march in Skokie, Illinois. The ACLU defended the free speech rights of the Nazis.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/lessons-in-free-speech-40-years-after-nazis-planned-skokie-march/
Codeine
(25,586 posts)X_Digger
(18,585 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)She was expelled for a violation of the campus code of conduct. Let's not pretend she's a martyr of freedom, but rather a dimwit who fully realized the consequences of her own actions.
Doesn't the implicit rather than inferred-via-bias apply in your post?
groundloop
(11,522 posts)A public university is partially funded by the state government, and is overseen by the State Board of Regents. It is not actually a part of the government. As such, it's my understanding that universities are able to set whatever standards of conduct they deem appropriate.
Also, I find it interesting that the University of Alabama took this action as so much of the civil rights movement took place here as a result of the horrible oppression suffered by blacks in the state at the time.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 19, 2018, 05:28 PM - Edit history (4)
all she did was speak, right? Did she engage in any conduct that resulted in actual harm (not just "my feelings were hurt" ) to anyone else?
groundloop
(11,522 posts)This falls in the same category. A university is not the government, just as my employer is not the government.
The first amendment says that the government shall not make laws restricting speech, it says nothing about employers (or civic associations, or universities, etc. etc. etc.) setting standards of behavior one is expected to maintain and still be allowed to be there.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)Going on a Twitter rant? That's protected speech.
Twitter can ban her; I have no problem with that.
Thanks for writing. I'm enjoying this thread.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,337 posts)... they enroll?
Are you really not aware that courts have allowed University and Schools to set minimum conduct rules to benefit the student body?
https://studentconduct.sa.ua.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2017/09/2017-Code-of-Student-Conduct-FINAL.pdf
Of course, students have obligations in addition to their rights. As members of an academic community, students must observe rules that benefit their classmates, their community, and their University. Students must practice personal integrity. By so doing, they respect the dignity, rights, and property of others. The University has a vital interest in the character of its students and, therefore, regards behavior at any location (on-campus or off-campus) as a reflection of a students character and fitness to be a member of the student body. The Code of Student Conduct thus creates an expectation of behavior that the University deems acceptable. By fulfilling these expectations, students can enjoy their own rights, while also respecting the rights of others and furthering the Universitys goals.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)Thanks for writing. Great thread.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,337 posts)Most people aren't going to want to go to court to press their rights to say "n*gger n*gger n*gger"
You'll just have to find another champion.
groundloop
(11,522 posts)NOT that there will be no consequences from sources outside the government.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)collected from taxpayers. They certainly are in Virginia.
That sounds like a gummint actor to me.
2016-17 salaries of Virginia state employees
{snip a big long list}
Thanks for writing.
djg21
(1,803 posts)State (public) schools are considered arms of State government for purposes of 42 USC 1983, so university administrators who were personally involved in alleged constitutional deprivations are subject to suit.
I dont know this website, but it contains citations to relevant SCOTUS decisions. https://www.thefire.org/in-court/state-of-the-law-speech-codes/
groundloop
(11,522 posts)I must say that I appreciate everyone here being able to keep a disagreement to relevant facts and not getting personal with it.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,600 posts)I'm about to take off for the afternoon.
Please enjoy the weekend, groundloop -- and everyone else.
melm00se
(4,994 posts)seems to be in conflict with this:
"As state entities, public institutions must conform to constitutional provisions that prohibit the state from discriminating and from denying constitutional rights. Thus, much of the law of public institutions stems from constitutional amendments such as the following..." (emphasis added)
http://law.jrank.org/pages/5366/Colleges-Universities-Legal-Climate.html
I am not defending this bonehead's actions but I am defending her Constitutional rights.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)crazycatlady
(4,492 posts)It means that you can't be ARRESTED for speaking up.
Girl was not arrested, she was kicked out of school. That was the consequences. Same thing if she were fired from a job for hate speech (like some of the torch carrying Nazis in Charlottesville were)
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)tenderfoot
(8,438 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)nwduke
(352 posts)Trump University!
melm00se
(4,994 posts)this will stick.
If the U of A, in a rush to address a PR nightmare, booted her without giving her due process, U of A will lose if this gets appealed.
raven mad
(4,940 posts)I'm glad I don't any more.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Fummel
(20 posts)I have a few words for her.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Harley Barber told the New York Post she was heading back to New Jersey after being kicked out of school. "I did something really, really bad," Barber told The Post. "I don't know what to do and I feel horrible. I'm wrong and there's just no excuse for what I did."
http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2018/01/harley_barber_apologizes_for_r.html