The First Amendment of the United States Constitution was on full display at �㽶����ֱ�� during a thought-provoking conversation that delved into the nuances of free speech on campus. The discussion on Oct. 1 brought together expert perspectives from psychology, law and administration. 

Kevin O’Neill, a panelist from the �㽶����ֱ�� College of Law, explained the context of free speech within the Cleveland State community. According to Cleveland State’s Free Speech and Expressive Activity Policies, “it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from free speech. . . However, campus community members may not substantially obstruct or otherwise substantially interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe.” 

“If [the regulations] don’t threaten viewpoints or ideas, then they are not the same kind of grave threat to our First Amendment values,” explained O’Neill. 

2024 Distinguished Professor Richard M. Perloff from the School of Communication approached free speech from a psychological perspective, acknowledging that students can sometimes self-sensor during controversial conversations due to pressures of on-campus engagement.  

“Our university should foster free speech to encourage civics and civil speech, to find ways for students to express their attitudes outside of social media but also have ways to help people correct free speech that is injurious and inaccurate,” said Perloff. He went on to encourage open dialogue and free speech also “for the sake of learning and making mistakes.” 

�㽶����ֱ��’s General Counsel Sonali B. Wilson took a deeper look at Cleveland State’s Free Speech and Expressive Activity Policies before �㽶����ֱ�� College of Law Dean and panel moderator Lee Fisher led a discussion on hypothetical situations involving issues around free speech and expression. 

To hear what each panelist had to say, .