Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.

In universities across the United States, the legal line between free speech and hate speech is fading. This leaves campuses vulnerable to bigotry, and Syracuse University is no exception. Legal precedents protect even the most harmful speech, forcing universities to navigate a delicate balance between upholding the First Amendment and protecting their students from discrimination.

In cases like Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason University (1993) and University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Post v. Board of Regents of University of Wisconsin (1991), courts ruled that no punitive action could be taken against offensive, racist or sexist speech on campuses. These rulings set a troubling precedent that shields hate speech under the guise of free expression, undermining efforts to foster inclusive, safe academic environments.

Syracuse University, like all institutions of higher learning, should be alarmed by the implications of these rulings. The inability to discipline students who engage in bigoted or harmful behavior compromises the safety and inclusivity of the campus environment. These legal precedents don’t just stifle university policies — they embolden hate.

As the legal system continues to grapple with the balance between free expression and hate speech, the stakes for our college campuses couldn’t be higher. The courts may have ruled, but the fight to protect our students is far from over. Universities must stand their ground, advocating for the rights of all students — not just to speak, but to feel safe, respected and included. This is not just a legal battle, but a moral one, and it’s one we can’t afford to lose.

Iota Xi, a fraternity at George Mason University, hosted a derogatory event, on April 4, 1991, featuring blackface and sexist stereotypes. The court ruled this behavior as constitutionally protected, highlighting the tension between speech that is legally permissible and morally unacceptable. Similarly, in UWM Post, the University of Wisconsin’s attempt to curb discriminatory language was overruled, with the court asserting that even hate speech is protected under the First Amendment.

These cases exemplify a growing problem. On paper, they protect free expression. But on actual campuses, they embolden those who wield their speech to harass and demean others based on race, gender, religion or other aspects of identity. When universities are stripped of their ability to discipline students for hate speech, they risk becoming breeding grounds for discrimination.

Cole Ross | Digital Design Director

Syracuse University is no stranger to the impact of hate speech. Events like the racist graffiti in Day Hall and fraternity skits in 2018 serve as stark reminders of how free expression can be weaponized to harm others. While SU responded with suspensions and investigations, its ability to act is increasingly suppressed by Supreme Court rulings.

For students who personally experience this hostility, the message is clear: legal protections for free speech can come at the cost of their sense of safety and belonging. By limiting universities’ power to enforce real consequences for hate speech, these rulings undermine efforts to foster a genuinely inclusive campus and leave many wondering if free speech is being used as a cover for unchecked discrimination.

At the heart of the problem is the judicial insistence on treating hate speech as free speech. While the First Amendment is foundational to academic discourse and debate, there’s a moral responsibility that accompanies it. The principle of free speech should not be a shield for hate.

Courts, however, continue to interpret it this way, forcing universities into a paradox where they must choose between protecting their students and upholding constitutional rights.

What we face is more than just a legal issue; it’s a moral and social crisis. When hate speech is allowed to thrive under the protection of free speech, the consequences ripple beyond individual cases. It sends a message to students that their identities are fair game for ridicule and dehumanization, and validates bigotry in the very spaces meant to challenge it.

This is not a problem that colleges can ignore or manage by simply amending their codes of conduct. Syracuse University, for example, can create diversity initiatives, promote open dialogue on inclusion and emphasize a welcoming campus culture. But when push comes to shove, legal precedents like Iota Xi and UWM Post still prevail, leaving administrations powerless to take meaningful action against discriminatory speech.

This is where the need for change becomes most urgent. Educational institutions must push back against these legal precedents and fight for their right to protect students from hate. A university’s commitment to free expression should be complemented by a commitment to creating an environment free from fear, harassment and discrimination. Courts should be challenged to recognize that hate speech on college campuses is not just harmful — it’s a direct threat to the educational mission.

The courts may argue that universities are places where ideas, even offensive ones, must be allowed to flourish. But when those ideas target individuals or groups with hatred and contempt, they undermine the core values of academia. Free speech should not be a license to perpetuate harm. As the legal landscape stands today, it allows exactly that.

For SU, the path forward is clear: continue fostering environments where free speech is encouraged, but not at the expense of inclusivity. And, when necessary, fight for a reinterpretation of the law. The line between free speech and hate speech must be drawn more clearly, and universities should be at the forefront of this battle. Because if we fail to recognize the difference, we risk allowing hate to dominate the very spaces that should be safe for all.

Max Lancer is a junior with a triple major in chemistry, biochemistry and mathematics. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at mlancer@syr.edu.

Published on September 22, 2024 at 10:11 pm