that leaders of great universities appear reluctant to speak up for the rights of independent inquiry and free expression for which Americans have fought.
Loading...
更多的由合同法、侵权法（torts，比如诽谤法）、劳工法（雇主当然可以制定禁止员工乱喷的社交媒体政策）来约束，和宪法的言论自由没有太大关系。
另外，吹哨人那个，和言论自由，其实也没太大关系，甚至都不是普通法，是现代的成文法，是打击欺诈犯罪行为的一种措施。
但是，套用言论自由，个人认为在这里是不适当的。但是，如果政府抓她，不让他说话，这个和言论自由才有关系。
当然，如果教授认为程序有问题，涉及打击报复之类的，向法院起诉，也是可以的。不过，法院的审理，我猜想也主要是审查程序是否正当。
对于言论自由，每个学校，每个人有自己的看法很正常。但是，个人认为，英美法的核心在于正当程序。正义就是程序正义，没有正当的程序，就没有正义。中国人，过于重视实体正义。其实，实体正义，人言人殊，没法搞的。比如，这个案子，大家对言论自由的看法就不一样。
was being punished for “standard conservative takes on very important social issues” and called the university’s actions “bullshit.” She said the hearing board report, which she referred to as both “brazen and absurd,” indicates “there is one and only one set of very narrowly defined statements or opinions that one can make about these sacred, protected groups—and Blacks of course being the main sacred, protected group.”
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression continued defending Wax Monday, calling for Penn to reverse its punishment.
“Simply calling a faculty member unprofessional, absent serious misconduct like sexual misconduct and research fraud, it’s not enough” to warrant this punishment, said Zach Greenberg, a First Amendment attorney at FIRE. He said academic freedom is meant to protect controversial speech and viewpoints “even when they may offend others.”
“If there is evidence that her grading is based on race or other improper factors,” Greenberg said, “Penn has not shown that.”