UC Berkeley students threaten to sue over Ann Coulter visit

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press


Updated 7:57 am, Sunday, April 23, 2017


BERKELEY, Calif. (AP) — The University of California at Berkeley students who invited Ann Coulter to speak on campus are threatening to sue the university if it doesn't find a proper time and venue for the conservative pundit to speak next week.

Harmeet Dhillon, who represents the Berkeley College Republicans, said in letters sent Friday to UC Berkeley's Interim Vice Chancellor Stephen Sutton and chief attorney Christopher Patti that if Coulter is not allowed to give a speech on campus on April 27 she will file a lawsuit in federal court because the university is violating the students' constitutional right to free speech.
 
"It is a sad day indeed when the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement, is morphing before our eyes into the cemetery of free speech on college campuses," wrote Dhillon, a committeewoman to the Republican National Convention for California and former vice chairwoman of the California Republican Party.
 
Berkeley officials on Tuesday informed the Berkeley College Republicans and the nonpartisan BridgeUSA, which organized the Coulter event, that it was being cancelled due to security concerns.

Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/education/article/UC-Berkeley-students-threaten-to-sue-over-Ann-11092189.php

[uppityperson]

1. So if they don't find a venue for me, I can yell violation of free speech?

If someone attending asks me to come, that is.

[pnwmom]

17. They offered her a slot on May 2 in the afternoon but she's insisting on April 27 at night.

The Club offered her the April schedule without getting approval from the U first. Berkeley administrators heard about it in the newspaper and then had to scramble to find a venue that could safely handle the event.

[uppityperson]

22. "Free speech" does not mean anyone can demand a venue any time any place that they want

Thanks for the info

[bucolic_frolic]

2. She's mouthed off so much

does she have anything left to say?

If she says something hateful, just if, can she be sued in return?

Of course I support free speech, but words that incite? Not so much.
In this day and age, with the internet, and instant real-time availability,
is the venue important?

Would she agree to be part of a balanced debate panel?

What would Martin Luther do?

Free speech her in return. Expose with sunlight any vileness that might be said.
Free speech as hatred of a political group should disturb us all. Civil society
can do better.

[still_one]

3. The question is who would be responsible for any damage that occurs to people or

property if a Coulter event has the potential to cause injury or damage?

Does the University have the authority to prevent certain events from occurring on its campus if they believe injury or damage could result from such an event?

[NobodyHere]

6. Ideally the people causing the damage

[still_one]

7. That would be hard to determine I suspect

[pnwmom]

16. +1000. n/t

[NastyRiffraff]

4. Free speech isn't the issue here

I don't know the legalities of a university cancelling a speech from someone invited by an official college student group, but it ain't free speech. I know this because nobody has threatened to arrest Coulter or anyone in the student group.

Free speech is a function protected by the Federal government. Basically, the government can't arrest you for saying stuff, even stupid stuff. There are a few exceptions, but in general that's it. The right of free speech does not mean that you must be given a venue, that your book must be published or your show cannot be cancelled. It just means the government can't arrest you, no matter how stupid your speech, writing, punditry, etc. is.

[pnwmom]

12. No, it isn't. The students didn't bother to coordinate the speech with Berkeley

before they arranged it.

Berkeley's statement says the first they learned about it was in the newspaper!

Then Berkeley said they needed more time to find a safe, protectable, venue, and they wanted the event in the afternoon, not at night. Berkeley offered May 2 in the afternoon instead of April 27th at night.

And of course the Rethug club and Coulter are screaming about that.

[HoneyBadger]

19. The university wants to keep the venue the same and slightly change time and date?

How does that change anything? Better video in the daytime? Personally I would change it to 6am Sunday morning. You would get a couple of hung over students and seriously cut down on people driving 300 miles to get there, put you get the blazing sunlight and eliminate most uninvolved bystanders.

If you are not going to make a change like that, why make any change?

[pnwmom]

21. No, there was no venue because the students had invited Coulter without getting

approval from Berkeley.

Not all venues at Berkeley are equally "protectable." They wanted one that was large enough and could be readily secured. Also, they preferred an afternoon event because nighttime events are more likely to be violent (and more likely to be invaded by outside agitators, which has been a problem at Berkeley.)

[HoneyBadger]

24. Well given that the University chose a weekday

There are very good reasons to schedule events in the evening for the convenience of the attendees who work or attend school during the traditional "day". Which is why 6am the day before Christmas is really the ideal time and day if you want to make it inconvenient.

[pnwmom]

32. Plenty of students take evening classes or have evening jobs.

This is an event intended for college students, who should have no problem arranging to come there in the afternoon -- it's their campus. And they won't even have to worry about conflicting classes because May 2nd is in the week they have no classes (because exams are the following week.)

[HoneyBadger]

25. Looking at the Berkeley calendar

School ends April 28th FYI

http://guide.berkeley.edu/academic-calendar/

So the afternoon of May 2nd is the effective equivalent of 6am the day before Christmas. Well played Berkeley.

[HoneyBadger]

27. 6am Sun May 28th looks good

Technically still the spring semester, and not a holiday

[pnwmom]

33. It's during Reading Week, the week with no classes that's before exam week. So the student

are still on campus, but they won't have any classes to conflict with her talk.

The school also offered several dates in September, but Coulter insists on the 27th.

[HoneyBadger]

39. Hilarious description of the week

http://www.dailycal.org/2013/12/04/accurate-description-dead-week-uc-berkeley/

[pnwmom]

40. Looks about right! n/t

[Henry Krinkle]

42. What a crock of shit!

UCB officials were notified well in advance...

Tuesday, March 28, 2017
Right-wing author Ann Coulter invited to speak at UC Berkeley in April

Campus spokesperson Dan Mogulof said in an email that he was aware that BCR submitted a room reservation request for the Coulter event Tuesday, although the timing and location of the event have not been finalized. According to Tahmas, BCR and BridgeCal plan to work with the campus administration after spring break to confirm the details of the event

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/03/28/right-wing-author-ann-coulter-invited-speak-uc-berkeley-april/

Dan MOGULOF

Title
Assistant Vice Chancellor, Public Affairs

http://www.berkeley.edu/directory/results?search-term=dan+mogulof

[Yupster]

43. This whole thing will come down to was she properly invited

Most schools have a whole chapter in their handbook on groups and how to invite speakers.

If the group didn't follow the rules, the school is okay. If they did, then Coulter will make as much out of it as she can claiming civil rights violations.

In that case, she'll love the fight.

[Henry Krinkle]

44. If that had been the case, officals could have played that card...

and the Berkley College Republicans (BCR), wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

In fact, it's actually two student organizations that were involved in inviting Coulter, BCR and BridgeCal...

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/02/19/bridging-partisan-divide-cal.

The article I posted earlier states that "The invitation was sent a few days ago, and Coulter just recently
responded"

On behalf of BCR, Tahmas drafted a letter to the Young America’s Foundation, a conservative organization that helps college Republicans bring speakers to their campuses, which Jandhyala passed on to Coulter. The invitation was sent a few days ago, and Coulter just recently responded, according to Tahmas. He added that she seemed “very excited” to speak at UC Berkeley.

That article is dated Tuesday, March 28, 2017, so for the sake of argument, lets just assume Coulter was invited
and responded the 3'rd week of March.

In the same article, Dan Mogulof "that he was aware that BCR submitted a room reservation request for the Coulter
event Tuesday".

Berkeley's rules, requirements and process for inviting speakers can be found here...

http://speakersbureau.berkeley.edu/process

The general guidelines are here..

http://speakersbureau.berkeley.edu/request-a-speaker

General guidelines

1) Fill out the form below to request a speaker. Requests must be submitted to us at least 4-6 weeks before the event. Please note that when you ask us to contact a faculty member and ask them to speak to your group, this is an actual invitation, not just an inquiry.

2) Organizations must guarantee a minimum audience of 40 guests for the event—and confirm this count with [e-mail] at least 10 days prior to the event. This minimum number ensures that the time expended by our speakers and those of you who organize the event is worth the effort. Please explore every avenue of publicity for the event to ensure maximum attendance.

3) If faculty speaking engagements have been initiated outside of the UC Berkeley Speakers Bureau, we cannot take any responsibility for the event.

Near as I can tell, BCR and BridgeCal fulfilled the 1'st requirement, and I have little doubt that they'll easily fulfill
the second.

As far as not following the rules on how to properly invite speakers? It's possible that they fucked up, however I
find it highly unlikely given that both groups have been down this road before and know how to play the game.

[pnwmom]

45. "The timing and location of the event had not been finalized,"

but the students decided to invite her and publicize the event anyway.

And now they're crying because Berkeley wants them to wait 5 days, till a large enough, safe enough, venue is open; and hold it in the afternoon.

Big deal.

[Henry Krinkle]

46. That's not what that means

Mogulof confirmed that that the 27th was the scheduled date, but the "timing" (as in what time of day),
has yet to be determined and announced.

As for the location, I can see that being unannounced until the number of attendees is known, and what
venues are available.

"Wait 5 days"? Why, what purpose would that serve?
Furthermore, Coulter has already said she can't make it on that date.

Personally, I think it would be better if the event was held during daylight hours as it would make it easier for
the cops, media, bloggers etc to obsessive, identify and have any trouble makers arrested.

[pnwmom]

47. Coulter hadn't "already" said she couldn't make it on that date. She said that

after the University offered that date -- after they read about the event in the newspaper, according to the University's statement.

And Berkeley has an open campus. It doesn't have an infinite supply of empty meeting rooms that can be well secured for an event like this. The purpose of waiting 5 days was because they didn't have openings in any appropriate (large enough,, secure enough) venue till that date.

As to your point about holding the event in the afternoon -- yes, that's what the University wanted also, for the same reasons. But Coulter was objecting to the afternoon timing as well.

http://www.abc10.com/news/uc-berkeley-responds-to-berkeley-college-republicans-attorney/433268671

UC Berkeley responded to the attorney's letter Friday refuting the claims of First Amendment violations. University officials said in the letter, the Republican group and BridgeCal had failed to consult with the university before signing the April 27 date, leaving the university unable to secure a safe venue available on the date.

"We are dismayed that your letter suggests a disregard of the professional judgment of law enforcement regarding security concerns, but we stand ready to work with BCR to find a date, time, and venue where its rights and campus security can be maximized. Campus administrators and staff will continue to communicate directly with BCR to promote that outcome."

https://news.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/CMP-ltr-to-Dhillon_042117.pdf

While I don’t think it is useful to address them all, your discussion of the background of the Coulter event contains a number of factual errors. BCR and BridgeCal apparently signed a contract committing themselves to an April 27 date without first consulting the University or obtaining security review by UCPD. This failure was particularly unfortunate in light of the fact that BCR had worked closely with UCPD on other events. Campus administration first learned of BCR’s requested date through newspaper reports. In light of serious violence that has occurred at recent events on and around the campus— including most recently, last weekend’s clashes between opposition groups of protesters in Downtown Berkeley that resulted in multiple injuries and arrests—UCPD immediately began conducting a security assessment upon learning of BCR’s invitation to Coulter. UCPD received mounting intelligence that some of the same groups that previously engaged in local violent action also intended violence at the Coulter event. BCR was informed of UCPD’s determination that one measure to mitigate these security risks would be to hold the event during the early afternoon. BCR was also informed that if that timing could be accommodated, the University would make security assessments of available venues to determine whether any protectable location was available for the date BCR and BridgeCal had requested. Unfortunately, after extensive review, the University determined that none of the limited number of adequately sized campus venues that could be protected from the known security threats is


available on BCR’s requested April 27 date. The University therefore informed BCR that it would work with the group to find an alternative date when the event could be held as safely as possible. Knowing that BCR was interested in a date in which students are on campus, and given the short time window before the end of the semester, the University originally suggested looking toward scheduling an event in the Fall. The campus continued working on alternatives, however, and determined that a suitable venue could be offered on May 2, while students are still on campus for Spring Semester. On behalf of BCR you have now rejected the May 2 offer, and so we have discontinued the extensive planning efforts that were underway to hold an event on that date.

[run_mac_run]

23. Coulter is DISGUSTING, but

YES, this is a Free Speech issue. Berkeley is a PUBLIC college using govt dollars. The 1st Amnd is to protect citizens from the govt(federal, state, county, city, etc) or public schools.

In 2014, the SCOTUS ruled that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” (Tinker vs Des Moines).

[mahatmakanejeeves]

36. Tinker is a lot older than that. 1965, maybe?

I'm at home on an extremely slow connection.

There have been many 1st Amendment rulings since Tinker.

Welcome to DU, where the 1st Amendment is for people whose opinion we like, not for people whose opinion we don't like.

Here we go. 1969. I didn't think it was that new.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District

[run_mac_run]

37. Sorry..you're right.

I cut/pasted the wrong date. Tinker is from 1969.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

38. No problem. There have been many rulings since then.

IANAL, so I don't keep up. I can't tell you what is current law.

You probably weren't here for the threads last week about Berkeley and Ann Coulter. You might be surprised to see how selective people here can be when it comes to the 1st Amendment.

[pnwmom]

41. No one's taking away her free speech. The students invited her without getting

a time and place approved, and Berkeley found out about it in the newspaper.

Then Berkeley had to find a big enough venue that could be properly secured (outside agitators have been showing up regularly). So the students are being offered May 2 in the afternoon instead of April 27th at night.

They're just enjoying making a fuss, and she loves the publicity.

[nycbos]

5. What if a troll like this gave a speech and no one showed up?

Last edited Sun Apr 23, 2017, 07:31 PM - Edit history (1)

That is the biggest FU you can give to someone like Coulter. She loves created outrage can anger. Ignoring her would send a powerful message.


It's kind of like making a lot noise when to distract visiting player is shooting a foul shot. It doesn't work.


If everyone in a home area was silent when a player was shooting a free throw it would probably scare this **** out of him.

[blueinredohio]

28. agreed

I totally agree, when the KKK came to my town only their own a**holes showed up which were not a lot. They've never been back.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

8. Coulter is odious, but blocking the speech is

fundamentally wrong, and couterproductive. It just gives GOP ammo. Free speech is a basic democratic right. Minds can't be changed in darkness, the toxic worldview will just fester. Counterproductive, and just makes people's beliefs even more entrenched.

[pnwmom]

13. Berkeley is saying that she can give the speech on May 2 in the afternoon

instead of April 27th at night.

They're saying that they only heard about the plans for April 27th in the newspaper, but they needed to find a location and time that would allow them to control security and protect the students better -- which makes sense to me, especially in light of recent events.

And they say that they should get a month's notice before a speaker is scheduled, so they can arrange for it. (Although this time they are settling for less.)

Seems reasonable to me.

[HoneyBadger]

20. 6am December 24th would be my choice

[Laffy Kat]

31. I'm all for free speech, too, but this sounds like an administrative issue at this point.

The U's student republicons didn't dot their i's and cross their t's.

[Hulk]

9. Let her come...let her speak.

What the hell are we so afraid of? She is insulting and ridiculous. She's "an entertainer"...a reich wing, Nazi-type hack; but don't "honor her" by threatening to let her appear. Sweet Jesus folks, let this dip shit, insulting wench come and spew her disgusting vomit to her "believers". She will quite probably scare off some of the audience that want to hear what she has to say. If not, at least she can go quietly into the sewer from whence she came.

I've seen her several times on Real Time with Bill Maher, who puts up with all this type of ridiculous crap. She's harmless. She is an ignorant, insulting skank - much like the cheeto idiot in the White House. NO HARM! DON'T prevent her from coming. Let he come and spew. If the brain dead repuKKKe club wants to put up with the expense of security for this idiot, then so be it.

What the hell are we afraid of??

[Sculpin Beauregard]

10. EXACTLY

[bucolic_frolic]

11. We're afraid of violence

and we don't like hatred, we become the target of hatred, we don't hate back very well

Hatred of liberals is not popular in our group, hatred itself is not popular here

[pnwmom]

14. Berkeley IS letting her come -- on May 2 in the afternoon instead of April 27th at night.

They said that the Club arranged the visit without consulting the U, and they only learned about it in the newspaper. They said they needed more time to arrange a venue that could be properly protected.

But Coulter and her Club are screaming that it can ONLY be on the 27th and can ONLY be at night.

[run_mac_run]

26. AGREE...

Exposure is the best disinfectant against bigotry and stupidity. Ironic that on a website with 'democracy' in it's name, some here will deny Coulter(as detestable as she is) the most basic DEMOCRATIC right.

[samnsara]

15. we shut down one of the Bundy crowds plan to hold a rally....

..because when we used Google Earth to get a photo shot of the proposed venue we discovered it was right next to a playground. That group proudly carried guns to all their events...but....not that close to a playground and kids! So we wrote to the owner of the building ( in this case it was the Lions or Elks or something) and asked them if they were prepared for the liability if the event got out of hand. Soon after, the event was cancelled!!! So........ you can always find a way to halt hate speech.

[Initech]

18. Let her speak.

And may nobody show up to feed the troll.

[pnwmom]

34. They offered her a venue on the afternoon of May 2nd, but she's holding out for April 27th at night.

The students screwed up by not arranging for a venue time and place in advance with Berkeley -- the administrators learned about the event from the newspapers.

[NewDealProgressive]

29. Trying to censor her is stupid.

Let's her speak to her crowd. Her words show who she is.

If you want to avoid the violence, keep the outsiders off of the campus. No black bloc provocateurs, no Nazi assholes. Students only. That will solve much of the problem.

[HoneyBadger]

30. Or use a sports stadium as a venue

And run everyone through an NFL style safety check. No mask, no armor, no weapons, no objects of any kind. Seat everyone as far away from the field as possible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Memorial_Stadium

Holding a free speech event with zero violence is not rocket science.

[pnwmom]

35. If you know the campus, you'd see how difficult it would be to keep outsiders off the campus.

But they ARE letting her speak. She and the students are insisting on April 27th at night, but the U has offered them May 2 in the afternoon (which will also reduce the number of outsiders.)

The students invited her to speak without getting a venue time and place approved by Berkeley ,and now they're squawking about it.

[Oneironaut]

48. The left has its own authoritarians.

Ann Coulter loves what these screaming babies are doing. They play into the cartoonish version of the left that the right is trying to push.

[maxsolomon]

49. Cal was trying to avoid VIOLENT CONFRONTATIONS IN THE STREETS

that's what is going to happen when the "free speech" warriors of the right meet Antifa's inevitable protests. it's not the content of her speech they're trying to stop. it's riots.

such a confrontation (in seattle on Inauguration Day) has already nearly gotten someone killed by a concealed-weapon carrier that panicked.

"authoritarians of the left". keep legitimizing their frames.

[HoneyBadger]

50. That is why Berkeley needs to hold these events at their football stadium

Not rocket science.

[HoneyBadger]

51. The Washington state shooting

Was a person of color being attacked by a white person. We call that racism. The person of color shot the attacker.

On the positive side, the shooter and the shot are on good terms now.