Judge pauses IU protest policy, says it likely violates First Amendment
An Indiana University policy enacted in response to pro-Palestinian protests will be paused after a federal judge ruled the policy may be violating students' First Amendment rights.
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
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
BROADCAST BIAS: Media coverage of NPR lawsuit against Trump hides what public media really is
National Public Radio started out its typically partisan week by filing a lawsuit against President Donald Trump over his attempts to defund NPR and PBS. Their lawyers arrogantly argued that Trump's actions violated the First Amendment. Somehow, freedom of speech requires conservatives to fund speech they oppose. Trump voters must fund virulently anti-Trump "journalism." Surprisingly, the morning and evening newscasts of ABC, CBS and NBC didn't report on this. But their streaming channels did. On the streaming CBS "Daily Report," they brought on legal expert Jessica Levinson to buttress the free-speech argument. "The First Amendment arguments that NPR brings up here, I think, are quite strong … because what's in the public record is the Trump administration saying, we don't like the content of what NPR is disseminating." At least CBS anchor Lindsey Reiser quoted from the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which clearly states that there should be "strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature." That passage has been ignored on a daily basis since 1967. NPR was mentioned in passing on Wednesday's "CBS Mornings." Reporter Jarred Hill cited, "On NPR Tuesday, Harvard`s president said the university has made real progress dealing with antisemitism." This was an interview with Harvard President Alan Garber where NPR morning host Steve Inskeep threw anti-Trump softballs, including: "Is the administration trying to damage, destroy or capture your university?" If you would like to count ABC's "The View" as a news show – and it's technically a product of ABC News, which is perpetually embarrassing – on Thursday, May 29, they celebrated NPR "founding mothers" Susan Stamberg and Nina Totenberg for Jewish American Heritage Month. Over treacly music, Sarah Haines hailed Stamberg as the first female anchor of a national broadcast news program with a "neutral and relatable tone." Then she gushed over Totenberg for winning seven awards from the American Bar Association, as if that group isn't a gaggle of Democrats. Haines oozed that "Nina was dubbed the Queen of Leaks by Vanity Fair for her award-winning reports on top secret Supreme Court Watergate deliberations and for breaking the bombshell story of sexual harassment allegations against Clarence Thomas – which he has denied." In reality, Totenberg has been a queen of leaks from Democrats seeking to damage Republican Supreme Court picks. She succeeded in ruining Douglas Ginsburg in 1987, failed to get Thomas in 1991, and she relished the unproven claims of Brett Kavanaugh's accusers in 2018. But she wrote an entire book relating how she and leftist Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg were the best of pals titled "Dinners with Ruth: A Memoir on the Power of Friendships." The "PBS News Hour" came to NPR's defense with a softball interview on May 27 that included more bias-denying absurdity from NPR CEO Katherine Maher. PBS host Geoff Bennett mentioned that Republicans accuse NPR of a liberal bias, and longtime NPR editor Uri Berliner "accused the network of having what he called a lack of viewpoint diversity. How do you respond to those critiques?" Mayer unleashed the chutzpah: "Well, I first of all, respond by saying we're a nonpartisan news organization. We seek to be able to provide a range of different viewpoints in terms of who we bring on air, the stories that we tell. ... My view is that that is a mischaracterization of our work. We do not seek to favor any political party at all." Bennett didn't note that Berliner investigated NPR news employees who registered to vote in the District of Columbia and found 87 Democrats and zero Republicans. That might make Maher look foolish. This was like CBS's "Face the Nation" hosting Maher and PBS CEO Paula Kerger on May 4. [Host Margaret Brennan helpfully suggested that when the president described the networks as "radical left monsters," she could only think of Cookie Monster from "Sesame Street." These networks are just like cute and fuzzy Muppets.] Brennan gently asked Maher about complaints about fairness: "How do you respond to the implication that your news coverage is not?" Maher typically claimed "We have an extraordinary Washington desk, and our people report straight down the line, and I think that not only do they do that, they do so with a mission that very few other broadcast organizations have, which is a requirement to serve the entire public.." Calling NPR "straight down the line" makes about as much sense as claiming the Rocky Mountains are a prairie. NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik was ordered to cover this lawsuit in the most one-sided way, both on "Morning Edition" and the very inaccurately titled evening newscast "All Things Considered." They didn't consider offering a conservative critique of the NPR lawsuit. At least CBS anchor Lindsey Reiser quoted from the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, which clearly states that there should be "strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature." That passage has been ignored on a daily basis since 1967. Folkenflik also appeared on the NPR talk show "Here & Now," where co-host Scott Tong intoned the usual silly corporate language: "No NPR official or news executive has had any influence on this story." And then the entire interview could be summarized as "So tell us what NPR's CEO said about this?" In other words, "No NPR executive viewed this beforehand" and ... it would pass with flying colors if they did. The idea that there is any objectivity or balance on this network is easily shattered by listening to it.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Gaza ‘hungriest place on Earth', all its people at risk of famine, UN warns
Gaza is the 'hungriest place on Earth' and its entire population is at risk of famine, warns the United Nations, as desperate Palestinians are shot at, starved, and forced from their homes by the Israeli forces. Calling on Israel to stop its campaign of deliberate starvation and allow food into the besieged enclave, the UN on Friday said its mission to help Gaza's Palestinians is the 'most obstructed in recent history'. 'The aid operation that we have ready to roll is being put in an operational straitjacket that makes it one of the most obstructed aid operations, not only in the world today, but in recent history,' the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) spokesperson, Jens Laerke, said. He said out of 900 aid trucks that were approved to enter from the Israeli side of the Karem Abu Salem crossing, known as Kerem Shalom in Israel, fewer than 600 have been offloaded in Gaza, adding that a lower amount of aid had been picked up for distribution. 'I have no flour, no oil, no sugar, no food. I collect mouldy bread and feed it to my children. I want to get a bag of flour for my children. I want to eat. I'm hungry,' a Palestinian told Al from Gaza City, Al Jazeera's Hani Mahmoud said the northern part of the Strip, which includes Gaza City, 'has not seen a drop of aid coming in that has been allowed in the past few days'. 'People in the central area, in the [southern] city of Khan Younis and Rafah are also struggling on a daily basis to find food supplies, particularly when it comes to flour and other basic necessities to help them survive these difficult conditions,' he added. After a nearly three-month blockade, Israel, under pressure from Western governments and international humanitarian organisations, allowed limited aid to enter the enclave and the resumption of limited UN operations. However, Israel also pushed for the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a shadowy United States-backed private aid distributor, to provide essential food aid to starving Palestinians. The UN and other aid groups have refused to work with GHF, saying it lacks neutrality and its distribution model forces the displacement of Palestinians. Still, UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters on Friday that while any aid that gets to those who need it is 'good', aid deliveries are having 'very, very little impact'. 'The catastrophic situation in Gaza is the worst since the war began,' he said. With only three of the four distribution points set up to receive aid from the GHF, people like Layla al-Masri, a displaced Palestinian, are leaving empty-handed. 'What they are saying about their will to feed the people of Gaza is all lies. They neither feed people nor give them anything to drink,' she said. Abdel Qader Rabie, another displaced Palestinian, said his family has nothing to eat. 'No flour, no food, no bread, we have nothing at home,' he said. 'Every time I go to get aid, I hold a box and hundreds of people crowd over me. Earlier, UNRWA [UN agency for Palestinian refugees] used to send me a message, [and] I would go and get aid. Now there's nothing. If you are strong, you get aid. If you are not, you leave empty-handed,' Qader Rabie said. Eri Kaneko, UN humanitarian affairs spokesperson, also criticised the type of aid that UN agencies are being allowed to bring into Gaza. 'Israeli authorities have not allowed us to bring in a single ready-to-eat meal. The only food permitted has been flour for bakeries. Even if allowed in unlimited quantities, which it hasn't been, it wouldn't amount to a complete diet for anyone,' Kaneko said. Palestinians who received GHF aid said their packages included rice, flour, canned beans, pasta, olive oil, biscuits, and the UN special rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, described the GHF as a 'bait to corral people' which 'violates every principle of international law'. 'This is aid being used … to push people out from the north into militarised zones … and it's about humiliating people, and it's about controlling the population. This has nothing to do with stopping starvation,' he said. Al Jazeera's Hind Khoudary, reporting from Deir el-Balah in Gaza, said not much food is coming into the enclave as the number of trucks entering and the aid they are carrying is very limited 'Despite the trucks' entry over the past few days, Palestinians say they have not really received any food because there have not been any normal distribution points,' she said, adding that many are going back with their pots empty. 'Some parents say they are giving their children water just to make them feel full. People say they are willing to do anything for one bag of flour or one food parcel. They are very desperate.'
3 hours ago
Poland holds a pivotal presidential runoff influenced by Trump, the far right and the war in Ukraine
WARSAW, Poland -- Poland is set to hold a presidential runoff election on Sunday between two candidates offering starkly different visions for the country's future. The winner will succeed President Andrzej Duda, a conservative who is finishing his second and final term. The outcome will determine whether Poland embraces a nationalist populist trajectory or pivots more fully toward liberal, pro-European policies. An exit poll by Ipsos will be released when polls close on Sunday at 9 p.m. local time, with a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points. Final results are expected Monday. Whoever wins can be expected to either help or hinder the agenda of the centrist government of Prime Minister Donald Tusk thanks to the presidential power to veto laws. The vote comes amid heightened regional tensions driven by Russia's war in neighboring Ukraine, security concerns across Europe and internal debates about the rule of law. It follows a first round on May 18, in which Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski won more than 31% of the vote and Karol Nawrocki, a conservative historian, earned nearly 30%. Eleven other candidates were eliminated. Opinion polls show the two men running neck and neck. Other factors add to the unpredictability. Nawrocki did much better in the first round than surveys had predicted, indicating that his strength was underestimated. On the other hand, large numbers of Poles abroad have registered to vote in the second round, which could help Trzaskowski. Nawrocki is a 42-year-old historian who was tapped as by the national conservative Law and Justice party despite a lack of political experience or party membership. But this is seen as acting in his favor, as the party, which governed for 2015-2023, seeks to refresh its image before a parliamentary election in 2027. Nawrocki's supporters describe him as the embodiment of traditional, patriotic Polish values. They believe U.S. President Donald Trump's support for him will strengthen Poland's ties with the United States and make the country safer. Trzaskowski, 53, is Warsaw's mayor and a close ally of Tusk. A deputy leader of Civic Platform, a pro-European Union party, he has been prominent in national politics for years. This is his second presidential bid after narrowly losing to Duda in 2020. Supporters credit him with modernizing Warsaw through infrastructure, public transit expansion and cultural investments. He is widely seen as pragmatic and focused on strengthening ties with other European nations. Nawrocki recently received a boost from Trump and other U.S. conservatives, who see the Polish election as part of a global battle between liberal and populist right-wing forces. His campaign has echoed themes popular on the American right, including skepticism toward EU bureaucracy and emphasis on Christian identity. His supporters feel that Trzaskowski, with his pro-EU views, would hand over control of key Polish issues to Paris and Berlin. Nawrocki also has been endorsed by the Trump administration and conservative Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Many European centrists are rooting for Trzaskowski, seeing in him someone who would defend democracy as it faces pressure from authoritarian forces across the globe. He has received the support of new centrist Romanian President Nicusor Dan — who recently defeated a far-right nationalist. Nawrocki has faced a number of scandals over the past months, but it's not clear that they are hurting him. In fact, they might have the opposite effect. Many right-wing voters don't believe the allegations and accuse the media of using its power to hurt him, creating what appears to be a rallying effect around him. Nawrocki himself has acknowledged that he took part in an organized brawl including football hooligans in 2009. A former boxer, he said he has taken part in various forms of 'noble male battle' in his life. Polish media have also reported on his connections to gangsters and the world of prostitution. Tusk accused Law and Justice party leader Jarosław Kaczynski of tapping Nawrocki despite questions about his past. 'You knew about everything, Jarosław. About the connections with the gangsters, about 'fixing girls,'" Tusk wrote on X. "The entire responsibility for this catastrophe falls on you!' 1. Security and war in Ukraine: With Russia's war in Ukraine in its fourth year, Polish voters are acutely attuned to issues of regional security. Both candidates support continued backing for Ukraine, but to different degrees. Nawrocki believes that Ukraine should never join NATO, while Trzaskowski believes Ukraine should be allowed to join one day when the current war is over. 2. Rule of law and democracy: Trzaskowski has pledged to support the restoration of judicial independence and repair relations with the EU, which viewed changes by Law and Justice as anti-democratic. Tusk has tried to change some legislation, but has faced resistance from the the outgoing president, Duda. Nawrocki, while less outspoken than his party patrons, is seen as likely to preserve Law and Justice's changes that politicized the courts. 3. Women's rights: Abortion remains a divisive issue in Poland, especially after a near-total ban was imposed under Law and Justice. Trzaskowski supports loosening restrictions and has backed proposals to legalize abortion up to 12 weeks. Nawrocki opposes any liberalization and has campaigned as a defender of traditional conservative values.
