The Supreme Court Declines to Review A Program at Virginia Tech
High Court Frustrates Conservative Justices with Its Decision
In a recent development, the Supreme Court has declined to review a now-defunct program at Virginia Tech, which once allowed students to anonymously report allegations of biased behavior. This decision has left two of the most conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., frustrated and has highlighted a contentious issue related to First Amendment rights on college campuses.
Program Terminated by the School
The program, known as the “Bias Intervention and Response Team” (BIRT), was initially created in 2018 by the then-dean of students at Virginia Tech. However, with the departure of the dean, the program was disbanded in early 2023. This led to the Supreme Court declaring the case as moot and vacating a lower-court ruling that had previously deemed the program constitutional.
Divided Opinions Across the Country
The case at Virginia Tech is just one of many as circuit courts in various parts of the country have differed in their decisions on similar anti-bias programs implemented by universities. These programs, established by hundreds of schools nationwide, aimed to address claims of discrimination on campuses but have drawn criticism for potentially suppressing unpopular speech, especially from conservative individuals.
Justice Thomas Highlights the Significance of the Case
Justice Clarence Thomas, expressing dissent, emphasized the high stakes involved in this matter for the United States higher education system. He argued that the absence of a resolution may lead to an inconsistent patchwork of First Amendment rights on college campuses across the nation. Justice Thomas was supported in his dissent by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.
The Legal Battle: Challenging University Bias Reporting Policies
The case at Virginia Tech was one of nine filed by an advocacy group called Speech First, challenging university bias-reporting policies that allegedly silenced conservative students. Notable conservative organizations, including the powerful Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, backed the challenge.
Details of the Disbanded Bias Reporting Program
The Bias Intervention and Response Team at Virginia Tech was primarily aimed at simplifying the reporting process and making it easier to track bias-related complaints. However, it did not possess the authority to discipline students accused of bias nor mandate discussions about incidents. Instead, it merely referred allegations of criminal activity and school code violations to the appropriate authorities. Virginia Tech officials clarified that the program did not pursue complaints related to protected speech. Nevertheless, Speech First argued that the policy created a climate of fear, causing conservative students to self-censor and avoid expressing their views.
The 4th Circuit Appellate Court’s Decision
Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit concluded that Speech First lacked standing to challenge the university’s bias-reporting policy. The Democratic appointees, constituting the majority in the 4th Circuit, maintained that reasonable efforts to promote a sense of civility on college campuses may coexist with students’ free speech rights. In contrast, the dissenting Republican appointee suggested that the uncertainty created by the bias system could lead to self-silencing among students.
Legal Challenges in Appellate Courts
Speech First has successfully challenged university anti-discrimination policies in three other appellate courts, subsequent to losing at the district court level. However, district court judges have found no concrete evidence to support claims that speech was being chilled. One such appellate court, the 7th Circuit based in Chicago, ruled against Speech First, referring to the lawsuit as speculative. Notably, the University of Illinois settled the lawsuit before it could be appealed, confirming that their bias-reporting team possessed no disciplinary authority. Some other universities have also modified their policies or disbanded bias-reporting offices due to legal challenges.
Dilemma of Universities in Balancing Free Speech and Campus Environment
Experts argue that universities must navigate the fine line between students’ free speech rights and their protection against a hostile or discriminatory campus environment. The bias-reporting teams are seen by some as a solution to address conflicts without resorting to disciplinary action, as they can resolve incidents more informally.
Chaotic Interpretation without Concrete Evidences
However, legal scholars and experts point out that judges are often left to rely on their own notions of the free speech climate on college campuses, as few cases involve actual incidents of disciplinary action by bias-reporting teams. Judges are required to make their decisions based on their interpretations and the perceptions of the speech environment.
Differing Opinions and Dissenting Views
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, known as one of the liberal members of the Supreme Court, also dissented. She expressed that the Court should have rejected the petition for reconsidering the ruling from the 4th Circuit, highlighting the petitioners’ failure to establish compelling grounds. Speech First Executive Director Cherise Trump expressed disappointment at the Court’s decision but credited the organization for the discontinuation of Virginia Tech’s bias-reporting policy. Trump reaffirmed their continued commitment to defending students’ right to free speech.
No Comment from Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech declined to provide any comment on the Supreme Court’s decision.
