Started By
Message
re: Help Me Understand This
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:02 pm to jonnyanony
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:02 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
Unless your argument is that I transposed the c and 3 for one post.
Well yeah that was a dig at your legal “knowledge” and I clearly made a correction to you in the same post.
1
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:02 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
cold gumbo
I eat food.
I also laugh at constitutional arguments without a basis of knowledge in how the constitution is applied.
Let me know when you file your suit.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:04 pm to jonnyanony
quote:
There is nothing preventing a public institution from releasing these rules, but if they (the public institution) enforced it, it would be a different story.
wtf man….thats the point of this whole thread.
quote:
"Effective immediately, no person wearing an opposing team's gear or colors will be allowed entrance into the student section," the email said. "Additionally, anyone found to be wearing opposing team apparel or colors in the student section will be removed."
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:05 pm to JudgeHolden
There are limits on free speech to maintain peace and safety, right?
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:07 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
First cogent opposing argument of the thread.
You must have overlooked my earlier post which, while not technically “opposing” you, mentioned a few things that any real constitutional scholar would recognize as reasons that a pretty low level of judicial scrutiny would be applied.
But have fun with your suit.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:08 pm to dkreller
quote:
Well yeah that was a dig at your legal “knowledge” and I clearly made a correction to you in the same post.
I mean I wrote 501c3 in my first post on this (you can see this on page 3) but thanks for catching the key legal argument that was transposing the IRS designation on a subsequent post, I guess?
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:08 pm to JudgeHolden
Your using this very loosely and taking far reached. The school represents the state but does not speak for the state. Schools are most certainly allowed to ban or limit clothing if they feel it is a safety issue. They cannot when it is a message that is political or does not align with thier beliefs. This is bias, safety is not.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:09 pm to meansonny
quote:
How is restricting access to a student section banning free speech?
Better. Not bad really. It’s like an accommodation theory.
So far you and Texag make the only fair points.
I’m getting tired and need to get ready for game day.
All BS aside, I think it’s probably wise for Ole Miss ( state or not) to keep order in the student section this way. I’m not sure it’s constitutional.
Thank you all for the diversion on game eve.
And I should walk something back.
In my hyped up pre-game state, and after one or two or twelve beers, I was a bit rude about Oxford’s racial history. Every place in the South has that stain to one degree or another. And from what I read, Ole Miss has made great strides. I honestly apologize for those comments.
I hope we kick your arse, Landsharks.
But I also hope everyone stays calm and no one gets hurt.
Again thanks. Out.
This post was edited on 9/18/26 at 10:12 pm
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:09 pm to Brisketeer
quote:
There are limits on free speech to maintain peace and safety, right?
Time and place provisions must be available.
You can temporarily make restrictions (i.e. curfews. Or require permits). But access to free speech on public space is protected by 1A.
In this thread's example, restricting the student section is not a violation of free speech in the stadium. Time and place are accomodated.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:10 pm to dkreller
quote:
wtf man….thats the point of this whole thread.
No?
Unless your argument is that a public institution cannot relay the rules set by a private one ...
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:12 pm to JudgeHolden
quote:
I’m getting tired and need to get ready for game day.
I'd argue you're already ahead of schedule.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:13 pm to jonnyanony
You’re insinuating that the private one directed the public one to make that statement.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:13 pm to dkreller
In no way did I insinuate that.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:14 pm to jonnyanony
Likely!
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:15 pm to jonnyanony
Dude you’ve been arguing for the Ole Miss Athletics Foundation this whole thread right?
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:17 pm to dkreller
What does "arguing for" mean in this context?
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:18 pm to jonnyanony
The basis of your 1A infringement (or lack thereof) has been that the Ole Miss Athletics Foundation is a private entity (501(c)(3)), correct?
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:19 pm to dkreller
And? Do you believe them to be a government entity?
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:22 pm to jonnyanony
I do not.
JESUS CHRIST MAN
I’m starting to think you’re actually fricking retarded.
The Ole Miss Athletics Foundation has not said peep about who can wear what colors.
THE OLE MISS ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT HAS.
THEY ARE IN FACT PART OF A PUBLIC ENTITY.
JESUS CHRIST MAN
I’m starting to think you’re actually fricking retarded.
The Ole Miss Athletics Foundation has not said peep about who can wear what colors.
THE OLE MISS ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT HAS.
THEY ARE IN FACT PART OF A PUBLIC ENTITY.
Posted on 9/18/26 at 10:24 pm to dkreller
This is 100% irrelevant. It literally does not matter.
A public institution is not barred from relaying the rules set by the private institution that is renting their space.
A public institution is not barred from relaying the rules set by the private institution that is renting their space.
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News