Judge pauses IU protest policy, says it likely violates First Amendment
IU revised its "expressive activity" policy in mid-2024 to ban overnight camping and use of structures, such as tents, without approval — hallmarks of the pro-Palestine protest movement.
In response, the Indiana Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging the policy last August. In its complaint, the ACLU alleged the university policy violates the First Amendment and is overly broad.
Judge Richard Young of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana agreed and granted a preliminary injunction May 29.
"The Policy likely burdens substantially more speech than necessary to further the University's interest in public safety and thus lacks narrow tailoring," the preliminary injunction reads. "The Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the Policy violates the First Amendment."
During the 2024 spring semester, protesters established an encampment in Dunn Meadow for several months. The protests drew national attention, resulted in dozens of arrests and required 'extensive repairs' of the area.
Under the now-halted section of the policy, students, faculty and staff could not engage in protests and other expressive activities from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. without permission. If violated, one could face a range of disciplinary actions, including suspension, expulsion, loss of university employment and a responsibility to pay for damages.
"While IU supports everyone's right to protest, camping or using any item to create a shelter is not a permitted form of expressive activity," the university said in paid content published in the Herald-Times last fall. "This ensures campus safety and accessibility for all community members."
IU did not provide a reaction to the injunction since the university does not comment on pending litigation, spokesperson Mark Bode said.
The USA TODAY Network - Indiana's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fifth Circuit blocks WT drag show ban, citing First Amendment
A federal appeals court has ruled that West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler cannot bar student drag shows on campus, finding the performances are protected under the First Amendment. In a 2-1 decision Monday, Aug. 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a ruling from U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, who had previously declined to block Wendler's cancellation of a student-organized drag show. The panel imposed a preliminary injunction, ensuring students may stage drag shows while the case continues in trial court. The case stems from Spectrum WT, an LGBTQ+ student group that planned 'A Fool's Drag Race' in March 2023 to raise money for The Trevor Project. Students promoted the show as PG-13, with restrictions on profanity and lewd conduct. Eleven days before the event, Wendler canceled it, writing in a campus-wide email that drag 'stereotypes women in cartoon-like extremes' and comparing the performances to blackface. Court's reasoning Judge Leslie Southwick, a George W. Bush appointee writing for the majority, said the context of Spectrum WT's event made its expressive message clear. 'Against this backdrop, the message sent by parading on a theater stage in attire of the opposite sex would have been unmistakable,' he wrote. The court emphasized that the constitutional principle at stake reached beyond this single event. 'Because theatrical performances plainly involve expressive conduct within the protection of the First Amendment, and because we find the plaintiffs' drag show is protected expression,' Southwick wrote, 'Wendler's censorship failed to pass constitutional muster.' From the archives: Lawsuit filed against WT and Texas A&M University System over canceled drag show Judge James Dennis, a Clinton appointee, joined Southwick's opinion. The panel also ruled that Legacy Hall, where the drag show was scheduled, is a designated public forum used by churches, political candidates and student groups. By barring drag performances, the majority concluded, Wendler engaged in impermissible viewpoint discrimination. The majority also cited Wendler's cancellation of another Spectrum WT drag show in 2024 and his repeated declarations that no such shows would be allowed on campus, finding students faced ongoing irreparable harm to their speech rights. Judge James Ho dissented, arguing drag is 'not inherently expressive' and that Spectrum WT had not shown it was entitled to such an 'extraordinary remedy.' Reaction from FIRE The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which represents Spectrum WT, hailed the decision as a reaffirmation of student rights. 'FIRE is pleased that the Fifth Circuit has halted President Wendler's unconstitutional censorship and restored the First Amendment at West Texas A&M,' said FIRE Supervising Senior Attorney JT Morris. 'This is a victory not just for Spectrum WT, but for any public university students at risk of being silenced by campus censors.' Speaking Monday evening with the Amarillo Globe-News, Morris said the ruling underscored a broader point. 'This decision makes clear that President Wendler cannot impose his personal views on students' expressive rights. The First Amendment protects drag shows just like it protects political rallies, concerts or theater.' Student pushback Even before the lawsuit, Wendler's ban ignited protests on campus. Students and alumni rallied outside the university, accusing administrators of censorship and discrimination. At one demonstration, WT alumna Coco Dietz said Wendler's reasoning was rooted in bias. 'We have never come into other's organizations to shut them down because of a personal bias or prejudice, so you cannot come here and shut ours down and not expect pushback,' she said, adding that Wendler was 'acting like this is a private Christian university, when we are a public university.' From the archives: WT student organizations' drag show raises $10,000 for Trevor Project amid controversy Lauren Stovall, vice president of Spectrum WT, framed the controversy as a fight for core freedoms. 'This is not an issue just about drag; we are protesting for freedom of speech,' she said. 'The First Amendment is what our country is built on: freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of petition. Walter Wendler is trying to take that away from us.' Wider drag debate in Texas The Fifth Circuit's ruling is part of a larger battle over drag in Texas. In 2023, lawmakers passed Senate Bill 12, which sought to restrict drag performances in public spaces. A federal judge later struck it down as unconstitutional, but the state has appealed, and litigation is ongoing. At the same time, the Texas A&M University System, along with the University of Texas and University of North Texas, adopted bans after pressure from conservative officials. Earlier this year, another federal court blocked the A&M System's prohibition, allowing the 'Draggieland' event to proceed in College Station. That case, like WT's, remains active. What's next The WT case now returns to federal district court in Amarillo. The university could appeal to the full Fifth Circuit or ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the injunction. For now, the decision ensures Spectrum WT can move forward with drag performances on campus while the constitutional fight continues. Supporters see the outcome as part of a broader warning to officials tempted to silence unpopular expression. As Morris put it, 'Students don't give up their rights when they enroll in a taxpayer-funded university.' On Aug. 19, West Texas A&M University said it does not comment on pending litigation. This article originally appeared on Amarillo Globe-News: Fifth Circuit blocks WT drag show ban on First Amendment grounds Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Marco Rubio Halts Gaza Visa Program Following Loomer's Explosive Revelations
The U.S. State Department, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has announced an immediate halt to Palestinian visas after conservative activist Laura Loomer posted videos on X showing Gazans arriving at U.S. airports. Over the weekend, Loomer shared clips from an organization called 'HEAL PALESTINE,' showing Palestinians entering the U.S. through the group's medical program. She argued the arrivals posed a national security risk, claiming Muslim-majority countries should take care of Gazans instead. 'Heal Palestine is more than welcome to send the GAZANS to Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, or other Muslim countries for medical care. The issue is, these countries don't want them because they know the GAZANS have terrorist tendencies. Are we supposed to endanger American lives so we don't get called 'racist' by a Palestinian organization?' Loomer wrote in a post on X. Rubio confirmed the freeze during an interview on Face the Nation, saying, 'We are not going to be in partnership with groups that are friendly with Hamas. We're going to pause those visas … and we are going to pause this program and re-evaluate how those visas are being vetted and what relationship if any has there been by these organizations to the process of acquiring those visas.' Loomer later expressed frustration, writing on X: 'It should freak everyone out that it took a civilian blowing the whistle on GAZANS coming into our country with State Department-issued visas as opposed to a government employee or terrorism analyst at the CIA flagging this.' HEAL Palestine pushed back, stressing the initiative is a medical treatment program, not a refugee resettlement effort. 'Guided by human and American values, HEAL is committed to offering hope and healing to the few young lives we can reach,' the group said in a statement. Solve the daily Crossword
Associated Press
36 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Fifth Circuit halts West Texas A&M drag show ban as free speech lawsuit continues
A federal appeals court Monday blocked West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler from enforcing a campus drag show ban, ruling that the performances are likely protected under the First Amendment. The 2-1 ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses a lower court's decision upholding Wendler's 2023 cancellation of a drag show, which he argued was demeaning to women and compared to blackface. The decision means Spectrum WT, the student group that brought the lawsuit, can produce drag shows on campus while its lawsuit continues in a lower court. Judge Leslie H. Southwick, who wrote for the majority, said the context of the students' event made its message of supporting the queer community clear. 'The viewers of the drag show would have been ticketed audience members attending a performance sponsored by LGBT+ student organizations and designed to raise funds for LGBT+ suicide-prevention charity, ' wrote Southwick, who was appointed by George W. Bush. 'Against this backdrop, the message sent by parading on a theater stage in attire of the opposite sex would have been unmistakable.' The court concluded that Legacy Hall, where the drag show was scheduled to take place, was a designated public forum open to a variety of groups, including churches and political candidates. That meant banning drag shows targeted the content of the event, something the Constitution allows only in the rarest cases. Finally, the court found that students faced ongoing irreparable harm to their speech rights, noting Wendler had canceled another drag show planned for 2024 and declared that no drag shows would ever be allowed on campus. That conclusion gave the judges another reason to block the ban for now, since courts only grant such relief when plaintiffs have a strong case and risk being harmed without it. In March 2023, Wendler canceled Spectrum WT's drag show intended to raise money for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit that works to reduce suicides in the LGBTQ+ community. He explained in a letter to the campus community that he thought drag shows — where participants often use exaggerated clothing and makeup to explore, celebrate or parody gender roles — were misogynistic. 'As a university president, I would not support 'blackface' performances on our campus, even if told the performance is a form of free speech or intended as humor. It is wrong. I do not support any show, performance or artistic expression which denigrates – in this case, women – for any reason,' he wrote. In September 2023, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a President Donald Trump appointee and former attorney for a conservative legal group that opposed LGBTQ rights, sided with Wendler. The case arose as Texas lawmakers were also targeting drag more broadly. The same year, they passed a law restricting some drag performances in public spaces, but a federal judge later struck it down as unconstitutional under the First Amendment. West Texas A&M isn't the only campus to ban drag shows. This year, the Texas A&M System adopted a systemwide prohibition, and the University of Texas and University of North Texas systems enacted similar restrictions following pressure from conservative officials, including Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare. In March, however, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Texas A&M System's ban, allowing the 'Draggieland' event at the flagship campus to proceed, also finding that students were likely to succeed on their First Amendment claims. That lawsuit is also still working its way through the courts. Judge James C. Ho dissented in the West Texas A&M case. 'Drag is not inherently expressive,' wrote Ho, who was appointed to the 5th Circuit by Trump and is the former Solicitor General of Texas. He argued that whether a particular performance conveys a protected message depends on the specific show, performers and audience. He said Spectrum WT had not shown it was entitled to such an 'extraordinary remedy' as a court order blocking the drag show ban. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which represents Spectrum WT in the West Texas A&M case and the Queer Empowerment Council in the Texas A&M System lawsuit, hailed the ruling as a major victory for student speech. 'We're overjoyed that our clients will now be able to express themselves freely, and we'll be watching to make sure that President Wendler obeys the laws of the land while the case proceeds,' FIRE Attorney Adam Steinbaugh said in a statement. A spokesperson for West Texas A&M could not immediately be reached for comment, so it's unclear how the university will respond to the ruling. The case now returns to district court in Amarillo, where the fight over whether West Texas A&M's drag ban is constitutional will continue. ___ This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
