Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Higher Education Free Speech topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RS 32082 introduced to bar campus ‘speech zones’ and require notice-and-cure before litigation
Summary
Representative Barbara Ehart asked the committee to introduce RS 32082 to clarify and expand student free‑speech protections on public college campuses, remove speech zones and limit prior-permission requirements; the sponsor agreed to add a 30‑day notice-and-cure requirement at the universities' request before enforcement litigation.
Representative Barbara Ehart (District 33) presented RS 32082, a campus free‑speech RS intended to assert that First Amendment protections apply fully on public college campuses and to restrict campus policies such as speech zones and prior‑approval requirements for outdoor speech.
Ehart told the committee the measure would "eliminate speech zones and limitations on where students can speak or distribute literature in the public accessible outdoor portions of a university campus," prohibit advance permission requirements in many cases, and shield students and student groups from disciplinary action for lawful expression. The sponsor said the RS also would prohibit institutions from discriminating against student groups based on religious, political, philosophical or other beliefs when those groups limit membership or leadership to people who share those beliefs.
At the request of Boise State University representatives, the sponsor offered a change to add a notice-and-cure step to the remedies section: before filing suit, a claimant would provide written notice of an alleged violation to the public institution; if the institution failed to cure the alleged violation within 30 days, the claimant could then bring an action. Representative Ehart confirmed the committee received copies of the proposed insertion and asked that the RS be introduced with that change.
Representative Marmon moved to introduce RS 32082 with the sponsor's change; committee members including Representative Nelson and Representative Mathias asked procedural and scope questions (for example, about speech by businesses located on campus and the definition of "materially and substantially disrupts"). Representative Mathias, who has a higher‑education policy background, asked about implementation and said those technical questions could be addressed in a full hearing with university representatives. The motion to introduce with the 30‑day notice-and-cure insertion passed on a voice vote.
Next steps: the RS will be printed for a hearing where university counsel and policy experts will be invited to testify on implementation, the standard for material disruption and the interaction with private businesses operating on campus.
