Bill Description: House Bill 240 would seek to protect free speech on campus by eliminating free speech zones, forbidding the abridgement of protected expression or charging onerous security fees for student events and organizations, and preventing harassment that denies equal access to educational opportunities.
Rating: +2
Analyst Note: House Bill 240 is nearly the same as House Bill 178 introduced early in the session. The only significant difference is that House Bill 240 removes the requirement that individuals must first provide institutions the chance to remedy violations of this act prior to seeking legal action.
Does it in any way restrict public access to information related to government activity or otherwise compromise government transparency, accountability, or election integrity? Conversely, does it increase public access to information related to government activity or increase government transparency, accountability, or election integrity?
House Bill 240 would improve both transparency and accountability regarding the protection of student’s free speech rights at colleges and universities.
To ensure compliance, House Bill 240 would require all public institutions of higher education to “publicly post on its website, as well as submit to the governor and the legislative services office a report regarding the institution's policies for implementing the requirements of this [act].”
The bill would also require a public institution of higher education to report to the state board of education any complaint alleging a violation of a student’s protected free speech activities. In turn, the state board of education would be required to compile a comprehensive report of such complaints and submit it to the governor and LSO.
Lastly, this bill would allow “any student or student organization may bring an action against a public institution of higher education and any of its employees, acting in their official capacities, for a violation of the student's or student organization's rights under this chapter.” However, it is worth noting that the bill mandates that a claimant must first provide a public institution written notice of the alleged violation and grants the institution a 30 “cure” period to address the issue.
(+1)
Does it violate the spirit or the letter of either the United States Constitution or the Idaho Constitution? Examples include restrictions on speech, public assembly, the press, privacy, private property, or firearms. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution or the Idaho Constitution?
House Bill 240 would protect students’ First Amendment rights on campus by prohibiting designated free speech zones, the abridgement of “protected expressive activity of any member of the campus community to speak on campus,” the charging of “security fees to a student or a student organization based on the content of the student's or organization's expression.” Moreover, the bill would also require all public institutions of higher education to establish “a policy prohibiting student-on-student harassment,” which it defines as “expression that is unwelcome and so severe, pervasive, and subjectively and objectively offensive that a student is effectively denied equal access to educational opportunities or benefits provided by a public institution of higher education.”
(+1)
