Free Speech Zones

by Lindsay Stewart

In an attempt to unite this campus and identify with conservatives on some issue, for the first and probably only time in my college career, I agree with Andrew Davis in his rejection of the free speech zones at Clemson University. Instituted in the early nineties, free speech zones were originally established as a way to “protect” protesters and other exhibitioners from harm. Advocates cited famous demonstrations such as those during the Civil Rights and Vietnam War era, pointing out the violence that occurred in the process, and arguing that these zones would ensure the safety of those who wished to exercise their constitutional rights.

Free speech zones were declared constitutional because they did not infringe on the content of what was said, the one aspect of free speech that is explicitly accounted for in the First Amendment. When the zones were first established, the Supreme Court reasoned that the location of where exactly one could practice their rights was not clearly defined. Therefore, since people were still allowed to say whatever they wanted within the limits of the free speech zones, these areas remained constitutional.

However, what these areas have become is a gateway to limiting free speech in general, largely because politicians have used them as a mechanism to discriminate against the opposition.

Our own President Bush has shown his adamant support of free speech and concern for the safety of individuals who choose to exercise their rights as US citizens by sending his Secret Service to locations before he arrives, and strategically placing these zones anywhere from a third to a half mile away from the site where he plans to speak. At one appearance by Bush in South Carolina, the only man carrying an anti-Bush sign was asked to move to one of the designated free speech zones. The man, Brett Bursey, refused to move, and was arrested and slapped with trespassing charges.

When asked why he was forced to move, police responded that it was the content of what Bursey was saying, and they were worried for the safety of the president. This is where the problem arises, and why individuals like Andrew Davis and others are protesting. Coincidentally, the individuals asked to move into free speech zones are typically members of the opposition, and the protection that protesters receive is usually in the form of cement walls or a chain-link fence.

Additionally, public officials have failed to understand that the First Amendment does not apply to private citizens. If I wished, I could tell anyone I wanted that they needed to remove themselves to one of the designated free speech zones, because I am not in a government position. However, government action is the mechanism that triggers the safeguards that the constitution provides. When the ACLU and others decide that these protections may have been violated by the administration (not private actors), a constitutional challenge arises.

To be fair, during the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, free speech zones were also used to “keep the peace.” However, instead of the cement walls usually bestowed to protect the safety of these individuals, Democrats thought they would add to the sanctuary of civil liberties by topping it off with razor wire.

Case in point, all political parties are guilty of misuse as protesters are sent to these areas as a way to keep them out of sight of the media, politicians, and, essentially, the general public. By allowing politicians and others the privilege to choose who does and does not have to assemble within the zones, they are, inadvertently, given the right to limit what the media and other nonprotesters can and cannot be subjected to. Ultimately, public officials have the ability to limit free speech by hiding behind the pronounced constitutionality of free speech zones.

In case you were wondering, the free speech zones at Clemson are located in the lower plaza of the Hendrix center and Cox Plaza in front of Johnstone. While these locations certainly do not remove protesters to an out-of-the-way location away from the eyes and ears of the general public, their mere existence leaves them vulnerable to abuse.

With the help of the Supreme Court, our government has succeeded in limiting the practice of your First Amendment rights and basic civil liberties to designated areas. On that note, remember that you must reserve these areas seventy-two hours in advance or you might have to wait until next week to speak freely.