Home   |   About Us   |   Latest News    |   Our Projects   |   Resources

California (1999)

A University of California policy prohibiting student governments and the University of California Student Association (UCSA) from lobbying has been overturned. The decision was announced on January 8th by Federal District Judge Breyer of the Northern District of California and may end a multi-year battle by California students for their free speech rights.

This decision comes in response to a complaint filed by the Associated Students at the University of California in Riverside last January. Their suit claimed that shutting students out of the political process violates their constitutional rights.

While the details of the case center around the effect Smith v Regents should have on California, this ruling sends a positive message to campuses everywhere. Breyer's ruling reinforces that lobbying does have educational value and suggests that there are serious constitutional protections attached to the right of students to lobby.

"I'm very excited and a bit relieved. After three years, we're finished with the case and I think it was a fair judgment," said Paul Song, Riverside Student Body President. Song has been a part of the case from start to finish. He was a member of the student senate when they originally decided to file the case. Now that the case is over, Song and the student government will be actively lobbying the legislature for more education and financial aid funding.

University attorneys who defended the ban in court are not necessarily sad to see the restrictions go. "We felt that the original California Supreme Court decision (in Smith v Regents) was somewhat intrusive," said Gary Morrison in an interview with the Chronicle of Higher Education. Morrison is the deputy general counsel for the University of California.

This decision is an important milepost in the legal debate surrounding funding of student activities. "This adds to the chorus of legal precedent that supports student speech as an important and constitutionally protected part of the University experience," said Robin Hubbard of the Center for Campus Free Speech.

Historical Background

This is not the first time the University of California has made headlines over campus speech. Their 1993 loss in the Smith v Regents case led to a host of restrictions on funding 'political' speech and activities. Unfortunately, the California ruling also spurred many other campuses to second-guess their own student fee policies.

However, the Riverside ruling is the second time in recent history that the University of California has been instructed to reverse restrictions on student speech put in place after the Smith ruling. In 1997 the University General Counsel's office restored the ability of all student organizations, except student government, to lobby. This decision followed a United States Supreme Court ruling which declared it unconstitutional for campuses to base funding decisions upon the content of an organization's speech (Rosenberger v Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995).

Both the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and the Riverside case give campuses a new standard to strive for. They reinforce that the forum created by student fees should embrace students' ability to express ideas, regardless of their 'political' or 'ideological' bent.

Back to Archive