NASPA Response to Executive Order on Free Speech on College Campuses. Retrieved from NASPA website https://www.naspa.org/blog/naspa-response-to-executive-order-on-free-speech-on-college-campuses

• This article speaks about the recent events of a student's acceptance to a university has been revoked due to controversial social media post. 
• Cohn (2020) states that the universities revoking students' admission because of controversial speech do not teach them to change their mindsets. 
• Cohn expands more on campus change, "To the contrary, the extensive participation of college students in campaigns for racial justice overwhelmingly paints a picture of a broad generational desire for equality." (2020, para. 7)

• Mangan (2019) speaks about the troubles colleges are having with freedom of speech on campus. 
• Campuses who refuse to move away from speech codes, designated protest spaces, or denying campus access to a controversial speaker can see the lost federal research money. 
• College campuses are in the midst of it all as they cannot take actions that will invade either party's rights.  

• The court case Doe v. The University of Michigan is based on the harassment code, which prohibits student behavior that may show stigma or victimizes students.
• The actions prevent students from attacking others based on their race, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, and creed.
• The court ruled this code to be unconstitutional as it invades students’ freedom of speech.
• The Supreme Court ruled that speech or conduct should not be punished because it can be offensive or improper.
• The court gave a statement that only allowed repercussions when there is physical violence. 

• The court case of Rumsfeld v. Forum of Academic & Institutional Rights is about law schools having to choose between hosting military recruiters on campus or losing certain federal funding.
• The Supreme Court ruled that institutions had the right to regulate conduct but not speech. Therefore, institutions were not violating the first amendment by not endorsing military recruiters on campus. 
• The court ruled institutions must provide the same treatment to military recruiters are they would for other recruiters or else the campus would be violating their first amendment right. 

• The president passed an executive order that prevents institutions from online censoring.
• The executive order says that freedom of speech is protected even when it is done online. 
• The executive order also states open discussions on the internet provide a public debate about different points of view. 
• This executive order adds to the Communications Decency Act 47 U.S.C. 230(c) as it protects individuals from the act of being censored

• The Angelo State Student Handbook outlines what students can do based on their constitutional right to freedom of expression.
• In the student handbook in section two titled Actions Against Members of the University Community or Others is a detailed list of wrongful actions that are not seen as freedom of speech such as: being disruptive or obstructive conduct,  being harmful, threatening, displaying  endangered behavior, or discriminatory, harassment. This sections helps manage freedom of expression as well as maintaining students safe. 
• In Part II: Community Policies under section P, there is a subsection for Freedom of Expression Activities and Forum Areas. Under this section there are reasons for closing
  or rescheduling an event. For example, the location has been previously reserved, if
  illegal actions are going on, if the rally blocks the entrances to buildings, or if there is a
  manifestation of danger.