Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v.
Southworth case brief summary
529 U.S. 217 (2000)
CASE FACTS
The court reversed lower court judgments invalidating the student fee program of petitioner board of regents of a public university as violative of respondent students' First Amendmentrights. Respondents had brought a First Amendment challenge to a mandatory student activity fee imposed by petitioner and used in part by the university to support student organizations engaging in political or ideological speech. Respondents objected to the speech and expression of some of the student organizations.
DISCUSSION
The Court reversed judgments invalidating petitioner's student fee program since the university's viewpoint neutrality requirement in the allocation of funding support was generally sufficient to protect the rights of the objecting students. However, the Court remanded as to the student referendum mechanism of the program since it was unclear what protection, if any, there was for viewpoint neutrality in that part of the process.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
529 U.S. 217 (2000)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Certiorari was granted to review a
judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh
Circuit and to decide constitutional questions arising from a program
of petitioner board of regents of a public university, which was
designed to facilitate extracurricular student speech at the
university.CASE FACTS
The court reversed lower court judgments invalidating the student fee program of petitioner board of regents of a public university as violative of respondent students' First Amendmentrights. Respondents had brought a First Amendment challenge to a mandatory student activity fee imposed by petitioner and used in part by the university to support student organizations engaging in political or ideological speech. Respondents objected to the speech and expression of some of the student organizations.
DISCUSSION
- The court held that U.S. Constitutional Amendment I permitted a public university to charge its students an activity fee used to fund a program to facilitate extracurricular student speech if the program was viewpoint neutral in the allocation of funding support.
- In general, the viewpoint neutrality requirement of the university's program was sufficient to protect the rights of the objecting students.
- However, the court did not sustain the student referendum mechanism of the university's program, which appeared to permit the exaction of fees in violation of the viewpoint neutrality principle.
- As to that aspect of the program, the court remanded for further proceedings.
The Court reversed judgments invalidating petitioner's student fee program since the university's viewpoint neutrality requirement in the allocation of funding support was generally sufficient to protect the rights of the objecting students. However, the Court remanded as to the student referendum mechanism of the program since it was unclear what protection, if any, there was for viewpoint neutrality in that part of the process.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
No comments:
Post a Comment