National Free Speech News & Commentary

Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed

Note: This is another perspective on ‘Porter v. Board of Trustees of North Carolina State University.’

Excerpt: A divided federal appeals court has ruled against a professor who alleged North Carolina State University retaliated against him for three instances of him speaking his mind.

Michael Bailey
The Free Press

Excerpt: I am best known for studying sexual orientation—from genetic influences, to childhood precursors of homosexuality, to laboratory-measured sexual arousal patterns.

Alex Morey, Graham Piro and Talia Barnes
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Note: This is another perspective on ‘Porter v. Board of Trustees of North Carolina State University.

Excerpt: The role of a faculty member at a college or university goes well beyond teaching and scholarship. As a function of “shared governance,” faculty play a critical role in leading an institution’s educational programming and initiatives. But yesterday’s ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit leaves faculty vulnerable to discipline for criticism of their institutions outside of class if it involves academic initiatives impacting the institution beyond the faculty member’s personal field of research.

By Kathleen Stock
UnHerd

Excerpt: Is it ever possible to take a neutral position on the importance of free speech? The task certainly seems quite difficult. As Vogue’s favourite philosopher, Amia Srinivasan, notes this month in the London Review of Books, many Right-wingers seem to assert the value of free speech, mainly or even only to make room for political views the Left would prefer smothered at birth. Occasionally, someone on the Right will complain about the suppression of a position or person they don’t agree with, but usually more to avoid complaints of inconsistency than anything else.

By The Editorial Board
Wall Street Journal

Excerpt: Big news on big tech and free speech. A federal judge ruled Tuesday that government officials can’t coerce social-media platforms to do what the Constitution forbids the government from doing.

Missouri and Louisiana, joined by scientists and conservatives whose posts were censored, sued to protect their First Amendment rights. The issue in Missouri v. Biden isn’t whether social-media platforms are government actors, but whether government officials can be held responsible for their censorship. Judge Terry Doughty ruled they can and his 155-page opinion describes disturbing coordination between the government and tech firms to suppress unpopular views, especially on Covid-19.

By Greg Sargent and Paul Waldman
The Washington Post

Excerpt: At first glance, the plight of Katherine Rinderle, a fifth-grade teacher in Georgia, might seem confusing. Rinderle faces likely termination by the Cobb County School District for reading aloud a children’s book that touches on gender identity. Yet she is charged in part with violating policy related to a state law banning “divisive concepts” about race, not gender.