Auburn bans student for Vescovi comment

[IPleadInsanity]

I can see him getting kicked out for what he said. I have a problem with it being a news story, it was 1 jerk not the entire student section. The media is highlighting any racial issue in en effort to divide this country and they are doing a wonderful job. Proof is the argument here on this board. This is what they want for some reason.

 

[VonVol2]

Its a very different situation when a government punishes speech versus a private entity.

Auburn has a right to decide who is allowed in their arena based on their behavior while there as much as any corporation has a right to withdraw support from an artist who says something they don't agree with. In my mind this had implications with how Auburn could recruit internationally and they felt the need to take action to show they won't tolerate that type of behavior. If you think other schools wouldn't bring it up with international recruits if nothing had been done I don't know what else to tell you.

 

[dobre_shunka]

Auburn has a right to decide who is allowed in their arena based on their behavior while there as much as any corporation has a right to withdraw support from an artist who says something they don't agree with. In my mind this had implications with how Auburn could recruit internationally and they felt the need to take action to show they won't tolerate that type of behavior. If you think other schools wouldn't bring it up with international recruits if nothing had been done I don't know what else to tell you.

Auburn is a governmental entity and therefore bound by the Constitution to permit free speech that isn't deemed obscene, threatening or likely to incite a panic. If this had been a private school, they would have been within their rights to remove him for that comment. A public school doesn't share that same right.

 

[Hacksaw]

Auburn is a governmental entity and therefore bound by the Constitution to permit free speech that isn't deemed obscene, threatening or likely to incite a panic. If this had been a private school, they would have been within their rights to remove him for that comment. A public school doesn't share that same right.

Not an attorney, but I would imagine Auburn has a right to enforce some standards of behavior in their public venues. So I'm not sure if it's really a free speech issue, strictly speaking.

 

[cardvolfan]

Didn't seem that horrible. What if he had said "go back to Tennessee, this is Alabama"

That would be a 3-year show cause order.

 

[Hacksaw]

Some people have such a hard time understanding this. And I bet quite a few of those same people are in the Shut Up and Sing crowd when it comes to artists voicing an opinion that doesn't jive with their own.

Just a guess, but something tells me you'd be among the first to complain if you paid to attend a concert and the artist started espousing political or social views you disagreed with. Am I wrong?

 

[cardvolfan]

Auburn is a governmental entity and therefore bound by the Constitution to permit free speech that isn't deemed obscene, threatening or likely to incite a panic. If this had been a private school, they would have been within their rights to remove him for that comment. A public school doesn't share that same right.

My guess is the Auburn legal experts are pretty up-to-date on what they can or cannot do in their own facilities.

 

[Sudden Impact]

Don't think it is a free speech issue as much as a Code of Conduct issue. Somebody nailed it above. Not really a protest or cause about sending SV back to Uraguay.
It was just a stupid comment by a student probably under-aged drinking.
Lawsuit--Poof and I don't see anybody from the ACLU running down to the plains to take a stand.
The kid screwed up and got banned???? TBD. Ask the fellow students in the section that probably turned him into security....

 

[VonVol2]

My guess is the Auburn legal experts are pretty up-to-date on what they can or cannot do in their own facilities.

Exactly.

 

[VonVol2]

Just a guess, but something tells me you'd be among the first to complain if you paid to attend a concert and the artist started espousing political or social views you disagreed with. Am I wrong?

You are wrong. I believe everyone is allowed their opinion. I've never let it affect how I feel about music or entertainment in general. I don't know why others allow it to get them so worked up.

 

[dobre_shunka]

Exactly.

I doubt the security guards who did this are constitutional legal experts who are familiar with relevant case law such as:

PAPISH V. BOARD OF CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI ET AL., 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Argued: N/A
Decided: March 19, 1973
Decided by: Burger Court, 1972
Legal Principle at Issue: Whether a university that expelled a student for reprinting an offensive cartoon and a profane article headline in a campus newspaper violated the 1st Amendment.

Action: The Supreme Court reversed the Eighth Circuit decision to uphold the student’s expulsion. The Court held that ideas distastefully expressed are not unprotected, that the cartoon was not legally obscene, and that the student’s expulsion was based on content, and not on a valid time, place, and manner restriction.

Importance of Case:
The Court reaffirmed the Healy v. James (1972) application of the 1st Amendment to public universities and refused to broaden what is considered legally obscene. The Supreme Court, quoting Healy stated, “state colleges and universities are not enclaves immune from the sweep of the 1st Amendment.” In reaching this result, the Court aptly stated: “mere dissemination of ideas—no matter how offensive to good taste—on a state university campus may not be shut off in the name alone of ‘conventions of decency.’”

 

[VonVol2]

I doubt the security guards who did this are constitutional legal experts who are familiar with relevant case law such as:

PAPISH V. BOARD OF CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI ET AL., 410 U.S. 667 (1973)

Argued: N/A
Decided: March 19, 1973
Decided by: Burger Court, 1972
Legal Principle at Issue: Whether a university that expelled a student for reprinting an offensive cartoon and a profane article headline in a campus newspaper violated the 1st Amendment.

Action: The Supreme Court reversed the Eighth Circuit decision to uphold the student’s expulsion. The Court held that ideas distastefully expressed are not unprotected, that the cartoon was not legally obscene, and that the student’s expulsion was based on content, and not on a valid time, place, and manner restriction.

Importance of Case:
The Court reaffirmed the Healy v. James (1972) application of the 1st Amendment to public universities and refused to broaden what is considered legally obscene. The Supreme Court, quoting Healy stated, “state colleges and universities are not enclaves immune from the sweep of the 1st Amendment.” In reaching this result, the Court aptly stated: “mere dissemination of ideas—no matter how offensive to good taste—on a state university campus may not be shut off in the name alone of ‘conventions of decency.’”

This appears to be a student who was expelled, not removed from a sporting event. I would think those are separate issues entirely. This is definitely not the first time I've heard of a student being removed from a game. I could be wrong. And if the school has now banned him from returning I would certainly think lawyers were involved, not just security guards.

I'm not sure who else watched the game but I did and this fan was incredibly loud and belligerent throughout most the first half. So I'm sure most people in his section wanted him removed regardless of content.

 

[volmandu]

It's not racist without including a derogatory reference to a race. It's not even necessarily xenophobic since he didn't indicate that he hates those from Uruguay. As others have pointed out, he probably can't even find Uruguay on an unlabeled map and certainly knows nothing about it's culture and government structure.

You really sound very ignorant .. he told him to go back to his country as he felt xenophobic for some one not from his country and his so called 'tribe' .. what he said was that he hates who are not from America in America. As an American, I can tell you that is not our Identity.

 

[volmandu]

So it’s about hurt feelings? Gotcha

Yes. Try being on the other end. Imagine your son being called a dumb ass red neck in New York or California. Racism stems from hatred on one side and being subject to racism hurt feelings too.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Yes. Try being on the other end. Imagine your son being called a dumb ass red neck in New York or California. Racism stems from hatred on one side and being subject to racism hurt feelings too.

My son would laugh at those idiots and walk away because he is mature and knows name calling isn’t a reason to stoop to someone’s level

 

[Hacksaw]

You are wrong. I believe everyone is allowed their opinion. I've never let it affect how I feel about music or entertainment in general. I don't know why others allow it to get them so worked up.

I'd guess maybe you tend to agree with the opinions most often being expressed. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course. But if I pay someone to paint my house, I don't want them standing around blathering about something totally unrelated -- even if I happen to agree with whatever they're saying. Same when I pay to go to a concert. I think that's where the shut up and sing stuff comes from.

 

[Hacksaw]

Yes. Try being on the other end. Imagine your son being called a dumb ass red neck in New York or California. Racism stems from hatred on one side and being subject to racism hurt feelings too.

I've heard redneck and jokes my whole life. And I've lived day in and day out in places where I was a racial minority. Sometimes it's challenging, but how you deal with it is up to you. Believe it or not, not everyone who has dealt with these things looks at themselves as a victim.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

My guess is the Auburn legal experts are pretty up-to-date on what they can or cannot do in their own facilities.

They can certainly throw somebody out. There is language on the back of the ticket or as part of the purchase agreement. But the kid could certainly sue (who makes the decision what type of speech or behavior is acceptable? Have they removed other fans?) and probably win since what he said wasn't obscene. He'd maybe win $100 and the lawyers would be paid thousands. That's our system.

 

[VonVol2]

I'd guess maybe you tend to agree with the opinions most often being expressed. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course. But if I pay someone to paint my house, I don't want them standing around blathering about something totally unrelated -- even if I happen to agree with whatever they're saying. Same when I pay to go to a concert. I think that's where the shut up and sing stuff comes from.

I guess I've never felt like paying to see a show gave me the authority to dictate what happens on the stage. Whether it be the artist's opinion or their setlist. If I decide to see Ted Nugent I'd expect he is probably gonna be opinionated. If I pay to see Drive By Truckers I expect the same. And the part that bothers me isn't just concerts. You see more and more people shouting the shut up and sing on social media as well. And 99% of the time if you look at that person's feed or profile they are posting constantly their opinion on politics. As if they have a right to do so but someone else doesn't. That's what bothers me.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

You really sound very ignorant .. he told him to go back to his country as he felt xenophobic for some one not from his country and his so called 'tribe' .. what he said was that he hates who are not from America in America. As an American, I can tell you that is not our Identity.

You're calling me ignorant yet you are embellishing what was said. "Go back to Uruguay. This is America." Where do you come up with "tribe" and he "hates who are not from America in America". And you are calling me ignorant? LOL.

 

[Hacksaw]

I guess I've never felt like paying to see a show gave me the authority to dictate what happens on the stage. Whether it be the artist's opinion or their setlist. If I decide to see Ted Nugent I'd expect he is probably gonna be opinionated. If I pay to see Drive By Truckers I expect the same. And the part that bothers me isn't just concerts. You see more and more people shouting the shut up and sing on social media as well. And 99% of the time if you look at that person's feed or profile they are posting constantly their opinion on politics. As if they have a right to do so but someone else doesn't. That's what bothers me.

Well, they're entitled to their opinion, as we've already agreed. It's different when you're at work and someone is paying you to do a job. Most people go to a concert to escape from things like politics and then you get it anyway. A lot of people consider that to be boorish and self-important behavior on the part of the artist. But if you don't then bully for you. Agree to disagree.

 

[VolGee4]

Auburn is a governmental entity and therefore bound by the Constitution to permit free speech that isn't deemed obscene, threatening or likely to incite a panic. If this had been a private school, they would have been within their rights to remove him for that comment. A public school doesn't share that same right.

Not necessarily true. Educational institutions are under a different standard for free speech. While students still have free speech rights, there is a balance between free speech and maintaining integrity within the educational system, which allows all students to be comfortable in the learning environment. I am pretty sure the US Supreme Court has developed the test. It’s not my area of expertise, but I know schools have different standards to enforce the educational mission.

Edit: I do realize colleges could be different from lower level schools, but I still believe they can take action against speech made in their facilities and within their sponsored activities.

 

[VonVol2]

Well, they're entitled to their opinion, as we've already agreed. It's different when you're at work and someone is paying you to do a job. Most people go to a concert to escape from things like politics and then you get it anyway. A lot of people consider that to be boorish and self-important behavior on the part of the artist. But if you don't then bully for you. Agree to disagree.

I see where you're coming from. I feel like the most people go to get away from politics part is probably depending on whether they agree with the artist or not. Lol. But thanks for keeping it civil. It is possible to disagree without getting hateful with each other.

 

[VolGee4]

NM.

 

[sport3500]

There is no excuse for that kind of behavior anywhere and glad to see that the Auburn security staff escorted him out of the building.