Ohio colleges could no longer ban controversial speakers, set up free speech zones under bill

Columbus Dispatch

A state senator says his legislation would create a more robust environment for free speech on state college and university campuses after the bill cleared the Senate Education Committee on Tuesday.

The measure later passed the full Senate unanimously, 33-0.

Sen. Andrew Brenner, R-Powell, one of the sponsors of Senate Bill 40, said the legislation was inspired by events like the violent protests surrounding conservative speaker Milo Yiannopoulos’ visit to the University of California-Berkley, which resulted in his speech being canceled.

This legislation would prevent events like this from happening, Brenner said. The measure would prohibit state institutions from encouraging behavior that prevents speakers from lawfully expressing their viewpoint in an area expressly reserved for the speaker or group.

“In seeing what was going on in other states and other universities throughout the United States, we felt (the bill) was needed to be brought here to Ohio so we can protect the freedom of speech for students on campus.”

The bill also would also prohibit state universities and colleges from establishing “free speech zones” on campus. Those are designated areas where public demonstrations and protests are permissible.

Some opponents of the legislation, however, say the bill would create unnecessary confusion and remove autonomy from state universities. David Jackson, representing the Ohio Conference of the American Association of University Professors, submitted written testimony in October against the proposal.

If the legislation passed, Jackson said he hopes the state also would allocate additional funding for security when a controversial speaker comes to an Ohio campus.

“There is a substantial difference between banning an idea and disallowing a controversial speaker that would cause massive disruption and create crowds that campus police could not control,” Jackson said.

The ACLU of Ohio agrees with the principles of the FORUM act but disagrees with several aspects of the bill. Gary Daniels, the group’s chief lobbyist, said the bill already delves into areas that have a First Amendment precedent and is therefore redundant.

“Lack of clarity in some provisions of SB 40 and too much rigidity in others will lead to further confusion for students, speakers and administrators,” Daniels said. “And it will inevitably conflict with future court rulings on campus free speech.”

Cole Behrens is a fellow at the E.W. Scripps Statehouse News Bureau.

Email: cbehrens@dispatch.com

Twitter: @colebehr_report