Students Reaction to Court Case

The Technique had printed an article once the verdict of the court case Sklar v. Clough was determined. The verdict was misrepresented in the Technique, saying that the court had ruled in support of Georgia Tech. Later they had to print a correction note. The ruling actually ruled that three of the four Tech policies in question, in their state at the time of the filing of the lawsuit, were unconstitutional. Chris Dempsey wrote to the Technique voicing how the case is constantly misrepresented and the plaintiffs' victories minimized.

"For simply asking that students’ rights be protected, Sklar and Malhotra have been met with an incredibly extreme and vicious reaction from racial slurs and libelous pieces to terroristic death threats and rape threats. For several months, Malhotra even had to go to class escorted by police cars. I am not implying that they are victims, but rather demonstrating the extent that people who claim to be tolerant will resort to when their thought monopoly is threatened."

He backs up Sklar and Malhotra for taking a stand for free speech and religious liberty. Mitchel Keller wrote to the Technique about a policy SGA adopted, which deals with the Student Activity Funds, that the judge in the court case declined to review. He created this policy and feels confident that the current policy now meets the appropriate legal standards. The Georgia Constitution declares, “No money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, cult or religious denomination or of any sectarian institution.” SGA does not prohibit funding partisan political activities, for there is documentation of having funded campus political groups in the past. The new policy precludes funding activities primarily intended to “support the election or defeat of a candidate for public office or to provide a monetary contribution to a political party.” SGA must allocate SAF funds in an unbiased manner and established an appeals process for students who feel SGA did not do this. This new policy enables all students to express themselves freely on campus without fear of censorship, punishment, or discrimination based on their beliefs. The Technique has allowed students to express their opinions and bring up matters that are important to students and let them speak their minds. This enables students to have more freedom. With the Technique and changes in the policy and speech codes, Tech is now more free of discrimination.

Sklar v. Clough

On March 16, 2006 two Georgia Tech students, Orit Sklar, a third-year Civil Engineering major, and Ruth Malhotra, a fourth-year Public Policy major, filed a lawsuit against Tech. They were appealing against the legality of Georgia Tech's involvement in activities like Safe Space and they felt their free speech rights were being harmed by Tech's policies and misuse of Student Activity Fees. The Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal alliance that's purpose is to "aggressively defend religious liberty", filed the lawsuit on behalf of the students for the school violating their rights of free speech, stated in the First Amendment. The students said that Tech's speech code had unconstitutional guidelines regulating speech, actions, and places of expression for anyone and those involved with student organizations. The part they disagreed with covered the aspect of disciplinary action, whether it be a warning or as severe as expulsion, for "Acts of Intolerance" against someone because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc. Sklar and Malhotra believe all students should have legal equality. They also said Tech discriminated against political and religious organizations, since the college won't fund partisan political activities or religious activities using Student Activity Fees, which is allocated by the Student Government Association. They also accused Tech of "religious indoctrination" because of the Safe Space program, which provides a supportive environment for members of GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered) and supports them with their coming out process. That spring of 2008, the court ruled three of these Georgia Tech policies unconstitutional. Tech had to modify their speech code and remove religious material from the Safe Space that might have discriminated certain religions or supported certain ones. These speech codes were originally meant to promote and protect diversity and tolerance and were put in place in the 1980s and 90s. In the Safe Space's training program manual was information that was considered to be discriminatory of religions. The manuals are used to train the college staff and students on how to counsel students. In it describes different religions' views on the morality of homosexuality. It was removed because it violated the Establishment Clause. Nothing was ruled to be done about the Student Activity Fees, but the judge warned it could cause issues in the future. Georgia Tech let the Pride Alliance, a student organization, have control of the Safe Space program now instead of it being a part of Tech's Office of Diversity Programs. With these changes enacted, Tech has stopped certain discriminations from happening. On a campus as large and diverse as Georgia Tech, it is impossible to have zero discrimination, but Tech facilitates to the students' needs and complaints to a point where there is a very low level of discrimination.