subsixteen the founder of -- the foundation for education. we have been talking this morning about the intersection of free speech and college campuses and censorship. that's in the news?

>> college presents resigning in one of the things we learned is your organization rated r. for 248 in free speech of 248. why did they get a rating in what was the criteria? it's funny because harvard responded like this was just their gessen psych notes based on the largest survey of student opinion on freedom of speech ever in the largest database of professor cancellation student cancellations the platforming in speech but when we put it all together harbored that a negative score. he got nearly negative scores in the entire history. so turned dead last place. what was the criteria? you look the teacher cancellations. smith professor cancellations. that means if someone gets suspended for their speech that's a big thing often it means whether or not their policies live up to constitutional first amendment

standards and we hold private schools to the same standard. we asked students or the comfortable having arguments with each other and also we asked the maya comfortable shutting down speakers and we evaluate all of those verses each other and michigan technological university is a great university university of chicago did really well and every ivy school did. think that is? and having an incredulous m.i.t. student it's like he can't possibly be that these ivy league schools are that much worse. i'm like no dear i'm so sorry i've been doing this for 22 years they absolutely are. a lot of the anti-free-speech ideology is more concentrated in the most prestigious schools. it's not a subtle effect at all. in your view greg lukianoff s.

presidency of the of the foundation for individual rights and expression should students be allowed to protest on college campuses and say out loud from the sea to the river. >> from the river to the sea. and just in the argument that is a call for genocide that there was an interesting article with someone asking students if they knew what that meant and showedb a map. once they saw that meant israel wiped off the map they started to -- so from a first amendment standpoint there's no question from the river to the sea isnt protected however any speech including that in certain contexts can be threats. it can be discriminatory harassment incitement of violence under specificn circumstances. shouting at the thought of her example or is it by itself protected absolutely? you your pelot degree from

stanford and where to stanford rates? >> stanford did not do great. he was in the bottom half. i have a little bit of hope for stanford though because jenny martinez the f former dean of te stanford law school really fought back after there was a very piercing shot down a fifth circuit judge kyle duncan last spring. we were very embarrassed by this , the alumni that is that what jimmy is done so far is at the gate for political neutrality at stanford. she talked about shots on shanai became the minister who was involved in that has been asked not to return to stanford and they promoted her to provost. do i have hope that stanford is on a better budget trajectory? >> will put the numbers on the screen to get the idea for the conversation is going to go. free speech censorship college campuses 748-8001 for

republicans. 748-8000 for independent and we will scroll through some of our social media sites as well is continuing the conversation as well as our text number. "the wall street journal" this morning said the ivy league basketball and an op-ed. three elite school presence before congress was a tour of mask up intellectual and political corruption of much of the american academy. that's a little bit out of your free speech but what he think about that? >> the biggest fear that comes out of the hearings is the university presents are goingmeo take the fact that we have dave clamp down on protected speech in the name of protecting speech but the decision at the university of pennsylvania

there's no way of free-speech person can lament that because she said we are going to abandon constitutional standards as informing our policies and university of pennsylvania by the way the second to last on ourse ratings. so am i concerned about what message president take from this? yes the same time ivy league schools arebl accountable but ao isn't. we have been reading about donors pulling money and withholding money unless this happens. is that a fair tactic? >> you know i think a lot of these schools have felt entitled dto the $100 million a course they are not.ot i have a serious issue however with donors if they are demanding professors be punished for students be punished for free speech however if what they are saying is we need to remove

impediments to speech and some of them are saying this wait to get rid, when the complaints about dei offices for example is their conformity's inducing an institution and unfortunately i've seen a fair amount of evidence that the administrator at stanford who was involved in that shutdown was the administrator of the cases we talked about harvard involving a dei graduate student and is the same thing repeated over and over again again. we've seen this problem at yale. i think talk about the mask falling off we need serious reform in higher education. even if you are just concerned about cost we need serious reform and when it comes to osfreedom of speech you need a t ofed steps here. i think the argument that i'm increasingly worried about the only talk about canceling his break in through some to some people who didn't realize it had become for this strange on-campus. greg lukianoff these are private institutions and they can make

their own rules. they came to all of them promised freedom of speech. interesting california private sectarian universities are required to live up to the first amendment and that the condition of taking money so stanford is technically required to live up to the first amendment standards. it's not in an official position that should be a national law but as we have seen schools voluntarily saying they are no longer going to live up to first amendment standards people should ask themselves should they be getting all this federal money? >> should twitter have been allowed to cancel a u.s. president from his web site and should x be left to put alex jones back on his web site? and wheno it comes to freedom f association one thing we do support is that socialt media companies have the right to make their own rules and they have the freedomth of association

rights to function as editors of their platforms so we definitely think. doesn't mean they are no free-speech implications to some of this. could they remove? absolutely. that's within their power to do. of course the argument is yesterday's also sitting president of the united states and its probably valuable to know what he says and thinks which i'm sympathetic to. when it comes to alex jones the argument against alex jones is not about protected speech it's about defamation. i'm from danbury never frenchies to come to my parties at my house all the time. we lost a kid at newtown and that was the addition of multiple parents is that they were paid actors faking that their children have been killed, really nothing is. i think the justification for picking -- taking alex jones off of x was strong. still was it within their power to do that? of course. what's the relationship to the aclu? i'm an old aclu guy myself but i

worked there 1999 and the former head of the aclu is a senior fellow who i'm honored that i got to ride with sometimes and he's one of my heroes in a sick great to get to work with her. we work with them whenever we have cases where we are on the same page. we are happy work together.