Wisconsin
Apparent Suspension of Student Groups at Wisconsin for Pro-Hamas Chalking
From FIRE’s letter sent yesterday to the University of Wisconsin (you can see the citations here); I generally trust FIRE’s factual summaries, but if there is any error in the below, I’ll of course be very glad to correct it:
FIRE is deeply concerned that UW-Madison has suspended two registered student organizations—Anticolonial Scientists and Mecha de UW Madison—amid criticism of chalk messages some group members allegedly wrote at an off-campus event earlier this month. Some of the messages expressed support for terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas’s Al-Qassam Brigades, and advocated the use of violence against Israelis and Zionists in the Middle East.
The student groups are currently under interim suspensions, pending investigation, with UW stating that, because “[s]ome chalkings endorsed violence, supported terrorist organizations and/or contained antisemitic comments,” they could qualify as prohibited discriminatory harassment under the university’s RSO Code of Conduct. But that conclusion cannot constitutionally stand. The off-campus chalk messages constitute political speech wholly protected by the First Amendment, which requires UW, as a public institution, to respect the groups’ expressive and associational rights—even if some, many, or most people dislike their message.
There is, more specifically, no First Amendment exception that would remove protection from speech simply because it is deemed “anti-Semitic” or otherwise bigoted based on race or religion. Regardless of the viewpoint expressed, the rule is the same: Government officials cannot circumscribe expression on the basis that others find the ideas offensive or hateful.
This is particularly true at public colleges, where “conflict is not unknown,” and “dissent is expected and, accordingly, so is at least some disharmony.” The First Amendment instead “embraces such heated exchange[s] of views.”
The Supreme Court has long recognized the public’s interest “in having free and unhindered debate on matters of public importance” as “the core value of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.” And there is simply no question that chalking support for any participants in the Israel/Hamas war—the reverberations of which have been felt globally for many months—constitutes expression on a matter of public concern, which is defined broadly as speech “relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community.”
Nor is there evidence (despite UW’s suggestion) that the students’ political messages, written in chalk at a farmers’ market nearly a mile from campus, would approach the legal bars for either material support for terrorism or discriminatory harassment—even if those same words had been written on UW’s own sidewalks.
The Supreme Court defines discriminatory harassment in the educational context as only those statements which are unwelcome, discriminatory on the basis of protected status, and “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victim[] of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school.” The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has likewise clarified that discriminatory harassment “must include something beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols, or thoughts that some person finds offensive.”
Current events do not change this analysis. Earlier this month, OCR reiterated that “offensiveness of a particular expression as perceived by some students, standing alone, is not a legally sufficient basis to establish a hostile environment under Title VI,” and that “[n]othing in Title VI or regulations implementing it requires or authorizes a school to restrict any rights otherwise protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.” OCR’s letter also emphasized that campuses have options for addressing the impact of hostile speech that avoid offending the First Amendment, including by offering a variety of support services to affected students.
UW’s own discriminatory harassment policies and RSO rules reflect these appropriate limits on its ability to punish core political speech, with the RSO rules clearly stating they “will not be used to impose discipline for the lawful expression of ideas” and that “[t]he right of all students to seek knowledge, debate, and freely express their ideas is fully recognized by the University.” This is surely because, as you know, free expression is a “longstanding priority” at UW-Madison, which has a dedicated mission and a values statement focused on “Free Expression at UW-Madison.” That statement describes “the need for the free exchange of ideas through open dialogue, free inquiry, and healthy and robust debate,” as “inherent” to the university’s educational mission, “captured by our now-famous language about the importance of ‘that fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone truth can be found.’”
Student organizations play an important role in the healthy speech ecosystem that UW’s mission and values seek to foster. In turn, the First Amendment protects these groups’ expressive and associational rights, fostering their ability to organize around causes and to attempt to influence our institutions, communities, and country. Nor can universities subject the speech of students in RSOs to additional, viewpoint-based scrutiny.
Instead, student groups’ speech rights are broad, and they extend to expressing philosophical support for the use of force or violence. As the Supreme Court has held: “What is a threat must be distinguished from what is constitutionally protected speech,” including “political hyperbole,” given our country’s “profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.”
Government actors may prohibit non-expressive conduct intended to provide material support, like property or services, to designated foreign terrorist organizations. But the First Amendment’s protection of robust debate prohibits government actors from limiting mere expressive activity or rhetorical support for such groups. That is so even where the net effect of the advocacy is to sway public opinion.
Despite what may be good intentions, UW does its community no service by censoring these controversial messages. Like many universities, UW is a community of people with sharply divergent views on a wide variety of issues. To the extent the chalked messages have informed UW students, faculty, and staff members of the presence of individuals with these views on campus, this should be seen as an opportunity for those who disagree either to engage with them in good faith—or, if they wish, to avoid such engagement. Censoring them will do nothing to change their minds, and will deny all parties the opportunity to learn from one another.
The First Amendment, and UW’s longstanding commitment to its attendant norms, are most relevant on campus at precisely the moments like these, when social and political unrest triggers high emotions, deep divisions, and the temptation to turn to censorship. When a university departs from its core principles at these key moments and resorts to silencing views it deems odious, it sends the message that the university has subordinated both the rights of its students and its mission of liberal education to the political demands of the day.
We therefore urge you in the strongest possible terms, in this difficult season for campus discourse, to stand by the university’s legal and moral obligations to respect students’ core expressive freedoms. This requires promptly reinstating the Anticolonial Scientists and Mecha de UW Madison student organizations, and publicly disavowing any ongoing investigation into their clearly protected political speech.
Given the urgent nature of this matter, we request a substantive response to our inquiry no later than close of business Thursday, May 23, 2024.
The legal analysis sounds quite right to me. Note that, even if the government could forbid chalking in various places (and it’s not clear whether it can), it can’t specially punish chalking that conveys particular views, including advocacy of foreign terrorist organizations and support for violence in foreign conflicts.
New Wisconsin athletic director Shawn Eichorst, who spent the last eight years at Texas, believes his new and old schools have much in common.
Both are well-regarded research universities in state capitals that belong to major conferences and have relatively similar enrollments.
He also pointed out one difference.
“There’s swag at Texas, right?” Eichorst said Tuesday during his introductory news conference. “There’s 30 million people in Texas. We’ve got swag, too, but we have a little humility with that deal. We need to get our shoulders up. We need to feel good about what it is that we’re doing.”
Wisconsin could gain more of that Texas swagger if its football program gets back to winning the way it did the last time Eichorst was employed in Madison. Eichorst, who most recently worked as a deputy athletic director at Texas, received a five-year deal worth $1.6 million annually, with provisions for increases and incentives. He was hired 2½ months after Chris McIntosh left to become the Big Ten’s deputy commissioner for strategy.
Eichorst worked at Wisconsin from 2006-11 when Barry Alvarez was AD and Bret Bielema was leading the football program. He followed that up with stints as an athletic director at Miami (2011-12) and Nebraska (2012-17) before Texas athletic director Chris Del Conte hired him in 2018.
He returns to Wisconsin with the Badgers coming off back-to-back losing seasons in football, a notable fall for a program that had 22 straight winning seasons from 2002-23. Wisconsin coach Luke Fickell has gone 17-21 after posting a 53-10 record with one College Football Playoff appearance in his last five years at Cincinnati.
Eichorst hasn’t worked with Fickell before but said he’s encouraged by their initial conversations.
“Obviously he’s won every place he’s been,” Eichorst said. “My expectation is more of me than him, meaning I need to pour into him, learn more about his program, how he has things set up, how his athletes are taken care of, how we’re supporting that endeavor. And then we can figure out, as we move along, what that might look like.”
Football struggles led to Eichorst’s downfall the last time he was an athletic director.
He fired Nebraska coach Bo Pelini in 2014 and hired Mike Riley, who had gone 93-80 in 14 seasons at Oregon State. Eichorst was dismissed shortly after Nebraska suffered an early-season loss to Northern Illinois in 2017. Riley was fired at the end of that season after going 19-19 in three years.
When Eichorst’s hiring was announced last week, he spoke about how much he had grown from that Nebraska stint. Wisconsin interim chancellor Eric Wilcots led the search and has emphasized Eichorst’s accomplishments at Texas, which has won the Learfield Directors’ Cup all-sports standings five times in the last six years.
Texas ranked anywhere from fifth to ninth in the Directors’ Cup standings in the five years before Wilcots’ arrival. Texas’ football team went a combined 23-27 from 2014-17 but has made two College Football Playoff appearances in the last three years.
“Everybody looks at the end result of what we did at Texas,” Eichorst said. “When we got there in 2018, we weren’t very good in a lot of areas. And that didn’t change overnight.”
Eichorst said one thing that has caught his attention about Wisconsin is the overall quality of its head coaches.
“You’re going to be as good as your coaches,” Eichorst said. “That’s it. If you have an elite group of coaches who are working together and uniting and galvanizing and learning from one another and taking it out to their individual programs, I think you can start to build something special. I go back to Texas. We built a room of really elite head coaches and put them at the top of everything we did to help guide us.”
Eichorst said this job is particularly important to him because of his Wisconsin roots. He was born in Lone Rock, about 45 miles northwest of the Madison campus.
He treasured his previous stint at Wisconsin and says he believes this school “represents everything that is great about higher education and college athletics.”
“Nobody will work harder for Wisconsin athletics,” Eichorst said. “I love this state, and I love everything that it represents. The passion is there. You can see it. I don’t have to make it up. I’ve lived it. It’s in my heart.”
___
AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports
Wisconsin
South Milwaukee, Wisconsin, officials in standoff with homeowner over year-round skeleton display
The city of South Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has ordered a homeowner to take down his year-round giant skeleton display or face fines, but the homeowner is standing firm and refusing, even as the deadline to remove the display has passed.
Now there’s a skeleton standoff.
The city cited ordinance violations in their order for Sean Oster to dismantle the lawn decorations. The notice specifically references “large Halloween decorations being displayed not during the appropriate time of year.”
Oster was also ordered to make other improvements to his property.
But Oster has refused to take down the display, which is re-dressed as the year goes on and is currently sporting a Fourth of July theme. The Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm, has come to his aid, saying the city’s actions violate Oster’s First Amendment rights.
City administrators declined to comment, citing a pending investigation. Neighbors have been divided by the display; some say they’re fine with it, and think it brings fun and positivity to the neighborhood, but some others want to see it removed and say the lawn should be kept up better and more consistently.
Oster said he’s hoping to reach an agreement with the city, and said he’s corrected all other violations outside of the display.
Wisconsin
Former Wisconsin judge to be sentenced after conviction in obstructing arrest of Mexican immigrant
Former Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, who was convicted of felony obstruction for helping an immigrant evade federal officers in a case that highlighted President Donald Trump’s sweeping immigration crackdown, is scheduled to be sentenced Wednesday in federal court.
Dugan, 67, faces up to five years in prison after a jury convicted her on Dec. 19. She resigned from her position as a Milwaukee County circuit judge two weeks later amid threats of impeachment from Republican state lawmakers. She had been a judge for nine years.
Trump administration tried to make an example out of Milwaukee judge
The Trump administration brought the case against Dugan as the president pressed ahead with his sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump’s administration and his allies branded Dugan as an activist judge, while Dugan’s attorneys said during the trial that the Trump administration was trying to make an example out of Dugan to “crush her.”
Immigrant rights advocates and other Dugan allies argued that the administration was trying to use her case to blunt judicial opposition to Trump’s immigration efforts. The case became a bellwether nationally in the conflict between the judiciary and Trump’s immigration crackdown.
Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, a fierce Trump loyalist running for Wisconsin governor, urged authorities to “lock her up” in a social media post following her conviction.
Dugan’s attorneys declined to comment ahead of the sentencing. Dugan did not testify during her trial, but her attorneys said she would be making comments to the court on Wednesday. That would be her first public comments on the case in more than a year.
Prosecutors push for ‘serious sentence’
Dugan’s attorneys argued that as a judge she was immune from prosecution. U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, who will hand down the sentence, has rejected attempts by Dugan to vacate her obstruction conviction.
Prosecutors argued in a sentencing memo filed last week that Dugan violated her oath as a judge and put both law enforcement and the public at risk.
“Judges are entrusted with tremendous discretion, but there is a line they cannot cross,” Executive Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Frohling wrote. “The defendant crossed that line.”
Dugan’s attorneys argued she has “punished enough,” including resigning as a judge and facing threats of violence. They argued in her sentencing memo that she should not be sentenced to any jail time besides the part of one day she already spent in federal custody.
Under federal sentencing guidelines, the presentence report calls for 15 to 21 months behind bars. The judge is not bound by those guidelines.
Prosecutors said the average sentence for obstruction cases is 16 months, but they did not recommend a sentence.
“This was a serious offense, and it warrants a correspondingly serious sentence,” Frohling wrote.
No matter what she is sentenced to, Dugan’s attorneys said they plan to file an appeal.
Dugan’s case was a first for Wisconsin
Dugan’s case marked the first time that a state judge in Wisconsin went to trial on charges of obstructing immigration agents. She was found not guilty of concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor.
On April 18, 2025, immigration officers went to the Milwaukee County courthouse after learning 31-year-old Eduardo Flores-Ruiz had reentered the country illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan for a hearing in a state battery case.
Dugan confronted agents outside her courtroom and directed them to the chief judge’s office because she told them their administrative warrant wasn’t sufficient grounds to arrest Flores-Ruiz.
After the agents left, she led Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a private jury door. Agents spotted Flores-Ruiz in the corridor, followed him outside and arrested him after a foot chase. A week later, FBI agents arrested Dugan in the courthouse, leading her outside in handcuffs.
Flores-Ruiz was deported in November.
-
Hawaii54 seconds agoThree West Hawaii sex offenders arrested – West Hawaii Today
-
Idaho4 minutes agoIdaho Power crews respond to outage affecting 2,163 customers in Canyon County
-
Illinois16 minutes agoAs Illinois enters 10th year under Evidence-Based Funding model, equity remains an elusive goal
-
Indiana19 minutes agoFAIRFIELD NATIVE AND HIS WIFE FOUND DEAD IN THEIR NEWBURGH, INDIANA HOME
-
Iowa24 minutes agoFrom caviar nuggets to bison, 10 new Iowa State Fair food trends
-
Kentucky34 minutes agoKentucky lawmakers hold town hall on AI data centers in Louisville
-
Louisiana39 minutes agoNorman C. Francis library naming honors Lafayette education legacy
-
Maine46 minutes agoLive updates: U.S. and Iran escalate attacks; jockeying starts in Maine after Graham Platner drops Senate bid
