Campus Hate Speech on Trial

"The campus has no need for policement of prejudice," political scientist Martin Gruberg has observed. "Universities should confront offensive ideas by rebuttal, not by suppression."

Despite commitments to free speech and the open exchange of ideas, American colleges and universities have increasingly ignored such recommendations by implementing numerous hate speech codes designed to protect students from racial, sexual, and other forms of harassment. Taking their cue from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which guarantees the right to a nonhostile workplace environment, these regulations have posed seemingly unresolvable conflicts between the ideals of free speech and equal protection.

In the first book-length analysis of this issue, Timothy Shiell offers an evenhanded review of the codes and of the litigation that has arisen from them. He explores both sides of the fiery debate over campus hate speech to bring out its philosophical and legal underpinnings, clarifying classic free speech arguments as well as the ideas of harm and hostile environment. He also presents numerous case histories that demonstrate the perplexing nature of the dilemma for jurists.

Shiell shows how campus speech codes have tended to be overbroad, arbitrarily enforced, and often used selectively to protect only certain groups. In pointing out that Title VII wasn't meant to apply to academia, he asks readers to consider the lengths to which courts should go in eliminating prejudice in this setting and presents a strong argument for the form these codes should ideally take.

This important book makes it clear that any policy, no matter how well grounded in history, law, or philosophy, will leave something to be desired, and concludes that the value of free speech must be upheld even in support of hatred. As the first systematic analysis of campus hate speech and Title VII, Campus Hate Speech on Trial challenges academics and general readers alike to reconsider how we deal with this important issue.