Penn State funds being reduced by the state legislature

[Volokh, Eugene]

        My tentative sense is that Penn State has no free speech rights
vis-a-vis the Pennsylvania government of which it is a branch -- I think
there are cases that hold, as John points out, that it can't even sue its
own government.  Nor do I think anyone else would have standing to sue,
simply because no other people or entities have been punished for their
speech.

        Eugene


John Noble writes:

> The following is also from the Penn State paper. No question about the
> state action here. Would it amount to a 1A violation?
>
> Digital Collegian, Feb. 5 2001:
>
>
>       State Rep. John Lawless made good on his promise to attend this
> weekend's student-run Sex Faire. But he didn't come alone - he brought a
> cameraman.
>
>
>       The event, funded by Womyn's Concerns, was aimed to discuss issues
> of sexual health, consensual activities and liberation. It also included
> games such as pin the clitoris on the vulva and orgasm bingo. ...
>
>
>       "This is a disgrace," Lawless said, when examining a table labeled
> "Smut and Other Great Literature." ...
>
>
>       The state representative sits on the state Appropriations Committee,
> which approves state funding for the university. ...
>
>
> Digital Collegian, Feb. 28, 2001:
>
>
>       HARRISBURG - Several state representatives joined the crusade
> against sexually explicit student events yesterday at Penn State's House
> Appropriations Committee hearing.
>
>
>       As promised, state Rep. John Lawless, R-Montgomery, played a
> five-minute video excerpted from one made at the student-run Sex Faire
> earlier this month. He repeated his statements that Penn State should be
> punished for failing to be "moral" leaders.
>
>
>       Lawmakers grilled Penn State President Graham Spanier in a four-hour
> session, broken only by breaks for the stenographer. Most discussion was
> about the appropriateness of the sexually provocative events sponsored by
> Womyn's Concerns.
>
>
>       Spanier again apologized for components of the event but said the
> university was  committed to free speech....
>
>
>
>
> Digital Collegian, Apr. 25, 2001:
>
>
>       The state House of Representatives voted yesterday to subtract a
> small amount of money from Penn State's appropriation, in a symbolic
> gesture against sexually explicit student events.
>
>
>
>
>       "I know what wrong is," said Rep. John Lawless, R-Montgomery, just
> before the house passed his budget amendment, 102-95. "Graham Spanier may
> not know what wrong is, but I do."
>
>
>       Lawless' amendment takes $9,520 from the more-than-$300 million
> appropriation, which still has to pass the Senate and be signed by Gov.
> Tom Ridge....
>
>
> There's also an interesting standing question. Assuming Penn State can't
> sue the State of Pennsylvania, who can? Can the event sponsors, or the
> students, premise a cause of action on the reduction in the University's
> appropriation to "punish" the state instrumentality's sponsorship of the
> event?
> As Paul Harvey would say -- the rest of the story:
> http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/news_specials/faire/faire.asp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20010428/00329116/attachment.htm