FIU has a student group that goes by the name "ICEBreakers." The goal of ICEbreakers is to end FIU's agreement to "deputize the FIU police department with the powers of federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents."
One of the arrows in ICEBreakers's quiver is public protest. And so when FIU's President, Jeanette Nunez, was interviewing a former pro athlete on FIU's campus on March 13, several ICEBreakers members who were in the audience protested. They did so by standing up between one to three minutes and facing the audience while wearing the same "ICE OFF FIU" T-shirts.
This prompted disciplinary action. FIU sent (most) of the students a letter that stated they had failed to comply with a school regulation and directing them to submit a two-minute "video reflection" "explaining your understanding of FIU Regulation 110, what is expected under FIU Regulation 110 related to indoor and outdoor areas, and how you will apply what you have learned moving forward." (Sounds kind of like the 2026 version of writing the same sentence over and over again on a blackboard).
In any event, the students instead filed a lawsuit that, among other things, asked the court to enjoin the school from taking action against the students.
Judge Becerra granted the injunction. She held that Regulation 110(3) ran afoul of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), because it categorically bans protests and similar expression inside university buildings whether or not they cause a material and substantial disruption. The protest here, Judge Becerra noted, didn’t appear to cause any such disruption: “[B]ased on the evidence submitted to date, it does not appear that any Plaintiff, or anyone else wearing an ‘ICE OFF FIU’ T-shirt, spoke or did anything other than sit, stand, and walk.”
You can read the whole order here.
1 comment:
I know this is pedantic. I'm also sure people have a contrary view, which they won't hesitate to express here.
But here goes: a trial court does not "hold" anything. That verb only works with appellate courts. A district judge can "find" something (if it's a factual thing) and can more broadly "determine," "conclude," or "decide" an issue. But trial / district judges cannot and therefore do not issue "holdings."
Post a Comment