Table of Contents
Penn State: Pulling the Wool over Your Eyes
Today, in , Penn State attempted to play damage control after significantly altering two patently unconstitutional policies. In what is probably the lamest justification for doing so, the Penn State tried to claim that, “These changes do appear to match up well with the interests of the plaintiff…but the revision would have been made in this manner regardless of any legal action.”
So the fact that Penn State was sued in federal court had absolutely nothing to do with an abrupt alteration in policies? Next time, Penn State might want to make sure that the revision history of and matches their story. The truth is that these polices have been around, in substantially the same form, since the early 1990s. This makes it extraordinarily hard to believe that the changes were merely routine revisions; if so, why did it take more then a decade to change the policies? It isn’t very hard to see through Penn State’s apparent ruse.
Would it really be so difficult for Penn State to just say, “We recognize that we have a legal and moral right to ensure a free exchange of ideas on campus, so we altered the policies accordingly”?
Recent Articles
FIRE’s award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.
To speak or not to speak: Universities face the Kalven question
As political pressure mounts, Dinah Megibow-Taylor explores whether recent institutional statements defend academic freedom — or quietly erode it.
FIREstatement on Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton upholding age verification for adult content
Today, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to uphold Texas's age-verification law for sites featuring adult content, effectively reversing decades of Supreme Court precedent that protects the free speech rights of adults to access information without jumping over government age-verification hurdles.
Orchestrated silence: How one of America’s most elite music schools expelled a student for reporting harassment
Rebecca Bryant Novak earned her spot at one of the world’s top music schools. But after reporting her advisor for harassment, she says the school turned on her. Now FIREis demanding answers.
FIREto court: AI speech is still speech — and the First Amendment still applies
Is AI-generated speech speech? In a new amicus brief, FIREsays yes — and warns that when it comes to free speech and emerging tech, early missteps can echo for decades.