• About
  • Contact
Wednesday, May 14, 2025
The US Inquirer
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Home
  • National
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Tech
  • Crime
  • World
PRICING
SUBSCRIBE
  • Home
  • National
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Tech
  • Crime
  • World
No Result
View All Result
The US Inquirer
No Result
View All Result
Home Politics

Supreme Court sidesteps dispute over “bias-response teams” on campus

by Melissa Quinn
March 3, 2025
Reading Time: 4 mins read
0
Supreme Court sidesteps dispute over “bias-response teams” on campus

RELATED POSTS

As Trump pushes diplomacy in Middle East, Qatar’s deals with his family spark ethics questions

Missouri lawmakers seek to repeal abortion-rights amendment approved by voters

Washington — The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider whether university “bias-response teams” chill students’ speech in violation of the First Amendment, sidestepping a clash of free speech rights and university efforts to root out bias on campus.

Justice Samuel Alito said he would take up the appeal from the organization Speech First, an organization that aims to protect free speech rights on college campuses. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the court’s denial of the case.

“Given the number of schools with bias response teams, this court eventually will need to resolve the split over a student’s right to challenge such programs,” Thomas wrote. “The court’s refusal to intervene now leaves students subject to a ‘patchwork of First Amendment rights,’ with a student’s ability to challenge his university’s bias response policies varying depending on accidents of geography.”

At issue in the case was whether the bias-response teams that have been created at hundreds of universities chill speech on campus. Speech First has mounted similar challenges to bias-response teams at the University of Michigan, University of Texas and University of Central Florida.

The efforts at those schools, however, no longer exist after they reached settlement agreements with the group that eliminated the teams.

Speech First’s suit targets the response team at Indiana University, which created a Bias Response and Education initiative that includes a bias incident process. Through this initiative, students who witness or experience a “bias incident” are encouraged to submit a report to alert the school. The university defines a bias incident as “any conduct, speech, or expression, motivated in whole or in part by bias or prejudice meant to intimidate, demean, mock, degrade, marginalize, or threaten individuals or groups based on that individual or group’s actual or perceived identities.”

The university says that bias incident reports are reviewed by a team of university officials who may initiate conversations around the incident and impacted students; refer the reporter to appropriate campus offices; and refer the impacted students to support resources. The team also logs reported incidents and tracks them for trends, notifies campus leaders of ongoing bias incidents and educates the campus community about bias, according to its website.

The bias-response team does not take disciplinary action, conduct formal investigations or “impinge on free speech rights and academic freedom,” its website states.

Speech First brought its lawsuit against Indiana University in May 2024 on behalf of members at the school who are “politically conservative and hold views that are unpopular, controversial, and in the minority on campus,” according to court filings. One student, for example, believes that “sex is determined by biology” and transgender women shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports, the group said.

But Speech First said the students censor their speech because of Indiana University’s bias policy and fear they will be reported to the school for committing a bias incident. 

The group asked a federal district court to block the university from enforcing its bias-incident policy and argued it violates students’ free speech rights. The court denied Speech First’s request for an injunction because of a ruling in a similar case involving the Bias Assessment and Incident Response Team at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

In that case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit found that Speech First did not have the legal right to sue because the University of Illinois’ team didn’t have the power to formally punish students. The 7th Circuit said Speech First failed to demonstrate whether any student faced an “objectively reasonable chilling effect” on his or her speech.

The appeals court then upheld the district court’s decision in the case involving Indiana University, and Speech First appealed to the Supreme Court.

“Bias-response teams chill speech by creating a formalized system where students constantly monitor and anonymously report each other to the university,” the group’s lawyers told the Supreme Court in its petition. “The reputational damage from being labeled a bias offender is chilling too. As is the knowledge that officials are logging and investigating protected speech. “

The high court has considered the issue of bias-response teams at universities once before. In March 2024, the court ordered a federal appeals court to toss out a case challenging Virginia Tech’s bias intervention and response team policy, likely because it had been changed.

But two justices, Thomas and Alito, said they would have agreed to hear that case.

“This petition presents a high-stakes issue for our nation’s system of higher education,” Thomas wrote in an opinion joined by Alito. “Until we resolve it, there will be a patchwork of First Amendment rights on college campuses: Students in part of the country may pursue challenges to their universities’ policies, while students in other parts have no recourse and are potentially pressured to avoid controversial speech to escape their universities’ scrutiny and condemnation.”

The U.S. Supreme Court


More


More

Melissa Quinn

Melissa Quinn is a politics reporter for CBSNews.com. She has written for outlets including the Washington Examiner, Daily Signal and Alexandria Times. Melissa covers U.S. politics, with a focus on the Supreme Court and federal courts.

Share6Tweet4Share1

Melissa Quinn

Related Posts

As Trump pushes diplomacy in Middle East, Qatar’s deals with his family spark ethics questions
Politics

As Trump pushes diplomacy in Middle East, Qatar’s deals with his family spark ethics questions

May 14, 2025
Missouri lawmakers seek to repeal abortion-rights amendment approved by voters
Politics

Missouri lawmakers seek to repeal abortion-rights amendment approved by voters

May 14, 2025
California Gov. Gavin Newsom proposes pausing immigrant health care coverage expansion
Politics

California Gov. Gavin Newsom proposes pausing immigrant health care coverage expansion

May 14, 2025
House Democrat backs off rogue attempt to force Trump impeachment vote
Politics

House Democrat backs off rogue attempt to force Trump impeachment vote

May 14, 2025
Trump wants drug price caps tied to foreign nations. Here’s why Biden never did it.
Politics

Trump wants drug price caps tied to foreign nations. Here’s why Biden never did it.

May 14, 2025
Donald Trump Jr.’s transformation into Washington power broker
Politics

Donald Trump Jr.’s transformation into Washington power broker

May 14, 2025
Next Post
Supreme Court to weigh Mexican government’s suit against U.S. gunmakers

Supreme Court to weigh Mexican government's suit against U.S. gunmakers

Trump to announce Taiwanese firm’s $100 billion investment in U.S. chip plants

Trump to announce Taiwanese firm's $100 billion investment in U.S. chip plants

Recommended Stories

Qatar to donate jet for Trump’s to use as a presidential plane, sources say

Qatar to donate jet for Trump’s to use as a presidential plane, sources say

May 11, 2025
FDA to undo some layoffs, after cuts to inspections and drug safety

FDA to undo some layoffs, after cuts to inspections and drug safety

April 28, 2025
What is rescission, the process Congress will use to make Trump’s DOGE cuts?

What is rescission, the process Congress will use to make Trump’s DOGE cuts?

May 9, 2025

Popular Stories

  • U.S. and China agree to major 90-day easing of tariffs as talks progress

    U.S. and China agree to major 90-day easing of tariffs as talks progress

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • House passes “Take it Down Act,” sending revenge porn bill to Trump

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Trump says U.S. will stop bombing Houthis after group “capitulated”

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Biden slams Trump policy: “What the hell’s going on here?”

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
  • Bessent and Lutnick sent plan for U.S. sovereign wealth fund — but White House has pushed back

    15 shares
    Share 6 Tweet 4
The US Inquirer

© 2023 The US Inquirer

Navigate Site

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Ethics
  • Fact Checking and Corrections Policies
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • ISSN: 2832-0522

Follow Us

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • National
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Tech
  • Crime
  • World

© 2023 The US Inquirer

Are you sure want to unlock this post?
Unlock left : 0
Are you sure want to cancel subscription?