Our guest law professor Bruce Pardy discusses his article "Public Universities, Speech Policies, and the Law: Fourteen Maxims." He defines the issues and clears up some common misconceptions about free speech and freedom in general for academics, administrators and students on campuses in Canada.
Queen's University: Bruce Pardy, Professor
Bruce Pardy in SSRN, Aug 20, 2020: Public Universities, Speech Policies, and the Law: Fourteen Maxims
Jordan Peterson in Thinkspot, Aug 28, 2019: The Queens University Talk
Below are the Fourteen Maxims copied from Pardy's article:
- ‘‘Freedom of expression” and ‘‘academic freedom” are distinct legal ideas
- Freedom of expression is a negative right, whereas academic freedom is both negative and positive
- Universities have no legal rationale to restrict the content of speech of its faculty or students, who are already restrained by the law
- No university policy on the content of speech is necessary for the university to impose no restrictions on the content of speech
- Simple policies protect free speech
- Wordy policies create the potential to limit speech
- Universities require ‘‘time, place, and manner” rules to protect expression
- Universities have no justification for imposing security fees on any speaker or lecture
- Government directives can be simple and have the force of law
- Government directives that require each university to develop its own policy on free speech invite policies that restrict the content of speech
- There is no right without a remedy
- Jurisprudence on the application of the Charter to speech issues at public universities is a dog’s breakfast.
- For most university speech issues, the Charter is a red herring
- Some free speech disputes are about unequal application of rules rather than ‘‘freedom of expression” itself
Theme Music "Carpay Diem" by Dave Stevens
Support the show