Supreme Court sides with Christian students silenced on Georgia campus
Source: ABC News
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with a former Georgia college student who sued his school after it prevented him from expressing religious views in a free-speech zone on campus.
The 8-1 decision, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, said that Chike Uzuegbunam -- who was silenced by Georgia Gwinnett College officials even after he had obtained a permit to proselytize and handout religious literature -- can seek nominal damages despite the fact that the school ultimately changed course and Uzuegbunam subsequently graduated.
In a very rare alignment of votes, Chief Justice John Roberts was the lone dissenting justice in the case.
"It is undisputed that Uzuegbunam experienced a completed violation of his constitutional rights when respondents enforced their speech policies against him," wrote Justice Thomas. "Because 'every violation [of a right] imports damage,' nominal damages can redress Uzuegbunams injury even if he cannot or chooses not to quantify that harm in economic terms."
Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-sides-christian-students-silenced-georgia-campus/story?id=76320592
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)GregariousGroundhog
(7,515 posts)From what I make of it, the plaintiff sued, asking the courts to void the university's policy and something along the lines of $1 in nominal damages. The university then changed it's policy after deciding that it either wasn't defensible and/or worth defending. The University then asked the courts to dismiss the case as moot, but the plaintiff continued to petition for nominal damages.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,271 posts)which the plaintiffs would like to be applicable elsewhere.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)but as a person intrigued by word and name origins, I do like the names in the case: Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)publicly on campus. This particular guy is a fairly normal Christian. This activity now carries the weight of a Supreme Court decision behind it.
littlemissmartypants
(22,590 posts)Although I am interested in the case and the law, my first reaction to the article was to research the names.
rgbecker
(4,820 posts)Polybius
(15,336 posts)Why would he vote this way?
Midnight Writer
(21,717 posts)not coming down on one side or another any more than he has to.
He is worried that the Court that will bear his name in history books will be remembered for its nutty extremist tilt.
I expect to see a lot of ambiguous votes by the Chief Justice, declining GOP agenda cases and avoiding setting precedents where he can.
Polybius
(15,336 posts)He didn't side with the liberals or conservatives. Unless he wants to be totally impartial and say "see, I'm fair and am completely independent from both sides."
BumRushDaShow
(128,514 posts)Somebody actually made him (or perhaps someone clerking under him) write something more than his usual "1-pagers".
(I counted and it's actually 11 1/2 pages long so for him )
Yeehah
(4,568 posts)Thomas is too stupid and lazy to write a single paragraph.
Crash2Parties
(6,017 posts)Asking only half sarcastically, based on recent cases they've dismissed that would've increased rights for LGBT students.
Beastly Boy
(9,237 posts)The precedent that SCOTUS had established in their decision will make it possible for any religious dogma to be proscelitized in public spaces of any university.
Think Muslims speaking freely about Islam on the campus of Fallwell's Liberty University.
Martin68
(22,768 posts)Liberty University is private, Georgia Gwinnett College is public, those are two different worlds, for instance Trump has learned the hard way he has no 1st amendment rights in the private sector. When you start to take taxpayer money then the constitution starts to come into play although in the case of universities it can sometimes be a bit...squishy.
As to Roberts dissent, perhaps he has a point in not setting precedence for the courts to get bogged down in such gray areas in which quibbling over a buck is concerned.
Martin68
(22,768 posts)What was the point of view the student expressed? What reasons dd the school give to explain their silencing of him?