News
Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line
News
At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions
News
Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists
News
‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam
News
‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6
WE ARE PLEASED that the majority has condemned the University's discipline of a select few of the protestors at Caspar W. Weinberger '38's November address. Certainly this action reeks of selectivism, political repression, and undue delay.
However, we disagree that Harvard--or any other private institution--can issue is own guidelines to cover the rights of speakers. Cases like the Weinberger disruption involve innumerable nuances of civil liberties. Using them as a departure point for creating one's own First Amendment standards only invites arbitrariness and future abuse of any such power the University might try to assume for itself.
The Constitution guarantees free expression to all, and the University's control of a podium does not give it license to regulate behavior of an audience. Only the courts can interpret the law, and only legislatures can write it. The University should never define official limits for a speaker's or an audience's actions.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.