Responding
this
week
to
a
federal
lawsuit
filed
by
two
students
against
the
Georgia
Institute
of
Technology,
state
attorneys
said
the
public
university’s
policies
do
not
limit
the
free
speech
rights
of
those
who
oppose
gay
rights.
Tech
does
not
"prohibit
or
restrict
expressive
speech
or
activity
by
students
or
their
organizations.
Students,
faculty
and
friends
of
Tech
have
the
right
to
make
statements
as
they
please
in
the
public
areas
without
fear
of
reprisals,"
Assistant
Attorney
General
Tamara
J.
Wayland
wrote
in
court
documents
filed
May
10
in
the
U.S.
District
Court
for
the
Northern
District
of
Georgia.
Georgia
Tech,
located
in
downtown
Atlanta,
was
sued
March
16
by
Southern
Baptist
student
Ruth
Malhotra
and
Jewish
student
Orit
Sklar,
both
represented
by
the
Alliance
Defense
Fund,
a
conservative
legal
group.
The
students
allege
that
as
College
Republicans
they
have
faced
discrimination
for,
among
other
things,
holding
an
anti-affirmative
action
protest.
They
also
feel
a
gay-rights
Safe
Space
program
on
campus
actively
promotes
certain
religious
beliefs
about
homosexuality,
also
allegedly
violating
federal
law.
"Plaintiffs
fear
that
the
discussion
of
their
social,
cultural,
political
and/or
religious
views
regarding
these
issues
may
be
sanctionable
under
applicable
Institute
speech
codes,"
the
lawsuit
states.
Described
by
social
conservatives
as
"speech
codes"
on
the
one
hand
and
by
social
progressives
as
anti-harassment
policies
on
the
other,
what
can
and
cannot
be
said
on
university
campuses
is
rapidly
becoming
the
target
of
lawsuits
across
the
country.
As
in
the
Georgia
Tech
case,
these
court
battles
often
pit
young
social
conservatives
who
feel
it
is
their
right
to
publicly
oppose
such
issues
as
gay
rights
against
their
more
liberal
professors
and
college
administrators
attempting
to
strike
a
balance
between
fair
and
unfair
debate.
‘Inherent
tensions’
During
the
1980s
and
early
1990s,
many
universities
attempted
to
combat
harassment
and
discrimination
with
so-called
"speech
codes,"
according
to
David
Hudson,
research
attorney
for
the
First
Amendment
Center
at
Vanderbilt
University.
But
several
lower
courts
and
federal
courts
have
struck
down
the
speech
codes
with
the
thinking
that
a
university
is
supposed
to
value
academic
freedom
and
be
a
locus
of
the
free
expression
of
ideas,
even
of
those
ideas
you
don’t
like,
Hudson
said.
Today,
however,
universities
now
define
"speech
codes"
as
anti-harassment
policies,
Hudson
added,
meaning
there
may
be
more
victories
in
court
for
schools
facing
lawsuits
such
as
Georgia
Tech.
"We
have
to
come
to
grips
that
there
is
inherent
tension
sometimes
between
the
equality
principals
of
the
14th
Amendment
and
the
liberty
principals
of
the
First
Amendment,"
he
said.
"And
somehow
we
have
to
find
a
way
to
protect
both.
You
don’t
want
harassment,
but
you
don’t
want
to
silence
viewpoints
either
—
it’s
a
tough
question
and
I
have
no
clear
answer."
David
French,
the
ADF
attorney
representing
Malhotra
and
Sklar
against
Georgia
Tech,
is
the
former
president
of
the
Foundation
for
Individual
Rights
in
Education,
a
leading
group
challenging
university
"speech
codes"
by
claiming
they
silence
conservative
students
viewpoints.
While
there
is
nothing
unconstitutional
about
non-discrimination
policies,
French
stressed,
making
some
speech
OK
and
other
speech
not
OK
is
simply
unfair
and
illegal.
Since
Malhotra,
whose
parents
are
from
India,
filed
suit,
she
said
she
has
been
harassed
by
students
on
campus
posting
fliers
stating
she
is
a
"twinkie
bitch"
—
meaning
she
is
yellow
on
the
outside
and
white
on
the
inside.
Malhotra,
who
graduated
from
Georgia
Tech
on
May
6
and
plans
to
attend
graduate
school
there
in
the
fall,
said
she
understood
there
would
be
backlash,
but
she
is
disturbed
by
death
threats
she’s
received.
"It
goes
to
show
that
we’re
not
the
ones
being
intolerant,"
she
said.
"But
I
don’t
need
a
speech
code
to
protect
myself."
Ken
Choe,
senior
staff
attorney
with
the
LGBT
Rights
Project
of
the
American
Civil
Liberties
Union,
said
public
institutions
"have
the
right,
and
even
the
obligation,
to
protect
people
from
harassment."
"They,
meaning
the
ADF,
are
trying
very
hard
to
couch
their
cases
by
describing
policies
as
‘speech
codes,’
but
that
is
a
mischaracterization,"
he
said.
"Speech
codes
sound
bad,
sound
offensive.
But
these
are
actually
anti-harassment
policies
they
are
attacking,"
he
said.
But
both
Choe
and
French
agreed
on
one
thing
—
that
the
best
way
to
fight
speech
you
don’t
like
is
to
combat
it
with
your
own
speech.
‘Safe
Space’
stigma?
In
their
lawsuit
against
Georgia
Tech,
Sklar
and
Malhotra
also
accuse
the
university
of
"active
religious
education"
through
the
university-sanctioned
and
gay-friendly
Safe
Space
program.
...
