On Thursday, Sept. 16, a group of students assembled to protest the potential placement of a strip mine on University property. After several problems and some confusion, they were allowed to be cordoned off across the street from Moody Music Hall and to assemble their protest within a bounded area.

Students living at The Bluff or The Retreat may have noticed the 40 Days for Life anti-abortion protests at the West Alabama Women’s Center on Jack Warner Parkway, which started on Sept. 22.

Who can forget, if you managed to catch him, the diluted version of Brother Micah on campus Sept. 14, standing at Reese Phifer Hall’s corner of the Quad with his megaphone and sign? He was quickly escorted off the premises.

Expressions of our First Amendment rights can be seen constantly, on both a local and a national level. And it’s something most Americans treasure.

So, it worries me that the University is being somewhat … semantic about First Amendment rights for students.

In the Sept. 27 article “Students face free speech limits,” it was said that universities feel constitutionally sound because they merely regulate where the free speech takes place and don’t put restrictions on whether or not the speech can take place.

Let’s take that to an extreme, for a moment. “We aren’t saying you can’t say those things. You just can’t say them in this country.” Sounds like a pretty grievous affront to First Amendment rights, yes?

It’s interesting to note, for those students who have been around long enough to remember, that the University’s changes to their Grounds Use Policy came during the summer (when no one was around) after an SDS protest in the Ferguson Center caused a stink.

It’s also interesting that, ever since, Brother Micah has not graced this campus with his boisterous presence, and every other preacher hell-bent on hellfire who has arrived on campus has been escorted off.

Now, I can understand why the University may want to curtail some of that. It’s “disruptive,” after all. But does that really matter?

It’s not interrupting classes from being held. If the argument is that it’s causing students to not go to class, every non-academic event should be put on hold and we should be treated like high school students.

As for safety, I can’t say I’ve ever felt in danger because of a preacher pretending he’s actually read and understood the Bible and trying to tell me that my hand holding and long hair will damn me to a fiery pit.

Perhaps some felt endangered with the aforementioned SDS protest, but that’s an easy problem to solve: punish indecent or endangering speech and let the rest go.

In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the U.S. Supreme Court observed, 7 to 2, that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and that “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” According to Justice Fortas, schools, in order to censor speech, “must be able to show that [their] action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.”

They are allowed, however, to forbid speech or conduct that would “materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school.”

That being said, I understand why the University changed its policy. However, it may be too much of a restriction. It simply feels like something is off about the whole policy.

While I strongly disagree with Brother Micah and his ilk, it seems he and others should be allowed to speak at a public university so long as safety is not an issue.

But my opinion may not matter soon. This October, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to see a case from 2006 dealing with the infamous Westboro Baptist Church and one of their nearly equally infamous funeral protests. The decision made in that case will put a huge precedent on private property, disruptive speech, speech that is generally instigative and evokes strong, negative societal emotion and so on.

I can’t be sure of my opinion on the subject. There are certain places, like funeral grounds during a religious ceremony, which should be protected from disruptive and condemnable speech. However, it also seems like there shouldn’t be a limit on the speech itself, and it should be definitely allowed in public forums, like a public school.

It is a difficult subject. But it’s an important one for students and American citizens in general. You may never join a rally or make a speech in your lifetime. You should certainly not let apathy overtake you on this subject. If you ever feel that your right to speak freely is slipping away, let people know. Don’t simply let the opportunity to protect and demand your rights pass by without a fuss. That would be, as Saban once said, “a damn cryin’-ass shame.”

Sean Randall is the assistant lifestyles editor of The Crimson White.