Public universities are a hugely valuable resource in this country. They provide (relatively) cheap college education to thousands of students each year, who might otherwise be unable to afford it, perform enormous amounts of research, making a great contribution to this country. The states, having an interest in educating their population, bringing and keeping educated people in the state, and in the academic and scientific research these institutions perform, provide funding, sometimes a substantial part of the budget, for these schools.
So does the state have a right to control controversial speech and activities provided by campus organizations?
According to the Washington Post, the student-run movie theater at University of Maryland was going to show some porn. To be specific, they were going to show the movie "Pirates II: Stagnetti's Revenge." After the film, a safe sex educator from Planned Parenthood was going to speak.
According to the article, "All the activities at the student union are funded by fees that students pay, not the state. The university did not pay for the movie and would have covered its costs with ticket sales."
Yet one MD state senator was so offended by a university showing porn that he proposed "a budget amendment: Any public university that allowed the screening of a triple-X film would forfeit state funding -- about $424 million next year in U-Md.'s case."
In another case, last year, the College of William and Mary hosted the Sex Workers Art Show on campus. It was the third year the show had been performed; every year, people protested. In 2008, in response to alumni protests, the university president asked that the performance be held off-campus. The organizers refused, and the president said that legally he could not prohibit them from performing/
Again, no state money went towards the show. Several clubs, including (I believe) the Lambda Alliance sponsored the show, and the Student Assembly allotted some funds- also from student fees- to help bring the show to campus. Any remaining costs were covered by ticket sales.
Again, the state stepped in. According to the USA Today article, the VA House of Delegates "grilled four members of the school board who are up for re-election, including the president." Ultimately, the university president's contract, up for renewal that year, was not renewed, and he resigned from the university before his term ended (there were other issues, as well). The SWAS was still performed, and was performed again there in 2009.
I understand that the state, having invested so much in these schools, has a compelling interest in their running. I can understand them wanting to ensure that state money is used to fund practical, cutting-edge education programs.
But simply because a university takes money from the state, does that give the state the right to control what organizations, student-run and funded, may do at the university?
I don't think so. I think it crosses a freedom of speech line.
What do you think? And what could be done?