Table of Contents
Misunderstanding āThreatsā at the University of Illinois
As we reported in a press release this morning, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is threatening a student with discipline for a comment he posted on Facebook.com. The student was a member of a now-defunct Facebook.com group formed in response to a movement to get rid of Illinoisā Native American mascot, āChief Illiniwek.ā The group called itself āIf They Get Rid of the Chief Iām Becoming a Racist,ā and the student in question posted the following comment:
Apparently the leader of this movement is of Sioux descent. Which means what, you ask? The Sioux indians [sic] are the ones that killed off the Illini indians [sic], so sheās just trying to finish off what her ancestors started. I say we throw a tomohawk [sic] into her face.
It should be obvious that rather than attempting to incite a tomahawk attack on campus, this student was simply registering his extreme displeasure using the type of over-the-top, hyperbolic language favored by students nationwide (for example, a quick search of Facebook.com groups at my alma mater reveals the existence of groups such as āEvery Facebook Group Should End With Bitchā¦Bitchā; āMOL 214 Makes Me Want to Punch a Baby in the Faceā¦and I LOVE Babiesā; and āStalking is the Sincerest Form of Flattery.ā)
Rather then giving this student the benefit of the doubt, however, the university launched an investigation into what Chancellor Richard Herman termed the āviolentā and āviciousā threats. While true threatsāwhich the U.S. Supreme Court has defined as āstatements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individualsā āare not protected by the First Amendment, this case does not involve such a threat. Rather, the studentās speech is what the Court has referred to as constitutionally protected āpolitical hyperboleā (the example the Court gave of such protected hyperbole was a statement by a draft protestor that ā[i]f they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J.ā)
This is truly a case of overkill on the part of the university. While the university has every right to decry speech that it considers offensive and inconsistent with the universityās values, it cannot, as a public institution, punish such speech. We hope the university will see this studentās comments for what they truly were and drop its unnecessary and unlawful investigation.
Recent Articles
Get the latest free speech news and analysis from ¹ū¶³“«Ć½app¹Ł·½.

FIREstatement on ruling that Trumpās funding freeze for Harvard was unlawful
The Trump administration trampled Harvard Universityās First Amendment rights and broke civil rights law when it yanked billions in federal grants and contracts over alleged Title VI violations.

New campus censorship hack turns trademark law into muzzle
Gallaudet University muzzled a student orgās social media account. Then FIREand Meta stepped in.

LAWSUIT: Texas bans the First Amendment at public universities after dark
FIREfiled a lawsuit today to stop enforcement of a new, unconstitutional law that turns every public university in Texas into speech-free zones.

FIREstatement on UT-Dallas student newspaper distribution
Freedom of the press isnāt a courtesy ā itās a constitutional right. UT Dallas can try to shut down a newspaper, but they canāt stop the news.