527
submitted 5 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Warjac@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

So they aren't being given their first amendment rights... Oh boy I can't wait to see how this plays out at other companies.

[-] the_joeba@lemmy.world 32 points 5 months ago

Harvard isn't a government funded organization, so the first amendment doesn't apply. Hopefully the students find a way to sue based on the college's own rules though.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 points 5 months ago

Well, technically, they do receive some government funding but the terms of the funds being allotted don't include adherence to the first amendment. It's not an entity controlled by state or federal government directly.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 months ago

Then all gov't funding should stop immediately.

If a business doesn't want to follow the Constitution, it gets zero tax dollars.

Btw as a Canadian I'm amazed that private businesses have this option at all. It makes no logical sense.

[-] Dran_Arcana@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Businesses "follow the constitution" here. The nuance is that the first amendment (freedom of speech) explicitly only applies to consequences from government. As a private corporation, the people running Harvard have the right to their own speech, in this case: a policy denying graduation, without consequence from the government.

I in no way endorse the speech that Harvard is expressing, but I do have the right to impose my own consequences on them for it (I.E not supporting things they do financially, disparaging them in an online forum like Lemmy, etc). The constitution prevents the US government from punishing Harvard for these actions in the same ways, unless a law has explicitly been broken.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 2 points 5 months ago

Okay but if a dude spends his stimulus package on a down payment for a vehicle then does the Government get to tell him how to use it? Government funding doesn't equal control in the USA, the terms of the funds were agreed upon long before it was received.

[-] Warjac@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I should like to think the law sees this a violation of the right the students have. Because to me if a private organization that has the power to give you a degree as you've paid for it's services and proven yourself as competent and that degree is recognized by employers, the government etc. Then it should have no right to impose it's values on people while withholding the end product of their use of services provided in the first place.

Anything otherwise would imply the organization can supercede the government. That would mean cases like this could come from other organizations that prop up would-be government functions and cause a ton of chaos.

I would understand if the protest was a major violation of the rules or it was intended to be a riot or some such other violent event but if my source for what happened is correct then that's not the case and this whole thing is a petty squabble coming directly from the board of Harvard.

this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
527 points (98.3% liked)

News

23296 readers
928 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS