« Harlan Crow and Clarence Thomas May Compel SCOTUS to Accept Federal Ethics Legislation | Main | Award for Candor by the Lawyer for a Political Operative »
Thursday, June 08, 2023
Policy and Identity
In an article on cancel culture in the Journal of Free Speech Law, Thomas Kelly illustrates cancel culture by arguing that a
"relevant test for today’s college students would be the extent to which they are willing to tolerate speakers who earnestly argue for propositions such as the following:
(1) That people who are currently in the United States illegally should be deported to their country of origin.
(2) That affirmative action should be abolished because it unjustly discriminates against whites and Asians.
(3) That for any adult person, having been born biologically female is both a necessary and sufficient condition for being a woman.
(4) That the fact that different racial groups are incarcerated at different rates does not primarily reflect racial injustice in the criminal justice system but rather that the groups commit serious crimes at different rates, something that is not itself due to racial injustice.
According to Kelly, these reflect four contestable questions. And college students' intolerance for their expression reflects cancel culture--disrespect for free speech and intolerance for competing ideas. Except one of these things is not like the other. Numbers 1, 2, and 4 involve questions of public policy--how government and government institutions should address particular problems (unlawful entry to the country, crime, opportunities to participate in institutions), the best policy choices, and what those choices tell us about those institutions. Number 3 involves a pure question of identity--it denies that trans people exist. A person's existence should not be debatable and should not be a question of policy.
I do not suggest that # 3 enjoys less constitutional protection or that a speaker should be barred from campus for expressing # 3. I do suggest that debating identity cannot be conflated with debating immigration policy or even debating the policy consequences of identity, such as athletic participation. The constant failure to distinguish these--especially as to LGBTQ+ people--is telling.
Posted by Howard Wasserman on June 8, 2023 at 10:07 AM in Constitutional thoughts, Howard Wasserman, Law and Politics | Permalink
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.