Conservative student group loses First Amendment case against SUNY Buffalo

The University at Buffalo adopted a plan after a controversial organization spoke on campus, the Young Americans for Freedom. The campus YAF chapter was part of a nationwide organization. The student government adopted a National Affiliation Ban, which derecognized clubs that remained "a chapter of or otherwise part of any outside organization." This meant the YAF was no longer recognized on campus. YAF then sued SUNY Buffalo.

The case is University at Buffalo Young Americans for Freedom v. University at Buffalo Student Organization, a summary order issued on Nov. 3. YAF brought this case under the First Amendment. But the students on both sides of the caption learned something about the First Amendment: the language of the First Amendment may speak in absolutes but its application is among the most complicated areas of constitutional law, as the courts have to balance competing interests: the interest of the speaker and the interest of the government.

YAF loses the case because the injury of derecognition, by itself, is not a First Amendment violation. The Supreme Court said that in 1972 in Healy v. James. They did not suffer the loss of reserving table space at the Student Union Building or classroom space for its weekly meetings. YAF did not seek out these opportunities, and no one denied them to YAF. There is no objective evidence that YAF was chilled from speaking on campus. That means there is no injury in fact and therefore no standing to sue.

YAF also loses because a university forum for student organizations is a "limited public form,"which grants you fewer rights than a full public forum where the government cannot discriminate based on the content of your speech. The Supreme Court in 2010 rejected a similar claim in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez. In such cases, the plaintiff can only win if the government discriminates on viewpoint.

But the Second Circuit (Parker, Carney and Nardini) says there is no viewpoint discrimination here. While YAF claims the new rules give the student government broad discretion to ban certain groups, the new rules are reasonable and therefore consistent with the First Amendment. SUNY argues that the Legal Status Ban limits the Student Association's legal liability and protects Student Association funds. It also prevents clubs from agreeing to predatory contracts, holding events without insurance, or depleting student government funds by virtue of a club's negligence.