The University of Florida is going to trial May 27 to defend its expulsion of a self-described white nationalist for an antisemitic post on social media.
The federal case could test just how far a public university can go in punishing offensive speech. And UF, the state’s flagship university, is often touted by Gov. Ron DeSantis as a bastion for free expression.
At issue is UF law student Preston Damsky. He first gained national attention last summer after his controversial remarks became the focus of town halls. He even got the highest grade in a class for his classwork and essay outlining his extremist views, which prompted national outrage.
But he was banned from campus based on an X post that quoted a controversial historian, saying “Jews must be abolished by any means necessary.” Then Damsky was kicked out of UF’s law school altogether in August. By September, he had filed a lawsuit, arguing UF was violating his protected speech under the First Amendment.
The lawsuit’s outcome could be significant for students across Florida – and even across the country – who face discipline from their state universities for speech considered antithetical to American values, or that may appear threatening or hateful.
One lawsuit against Florida International University and another against UF also involve students facing discipline for antisemitic conduct.
In the two-day trial in Gainesville’s federal courthouse, U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor will be hearing from UF law professors and administrative officials who contend Damsky’s speech surpassed the bounds of the First Amendment by imposing a threat to the student body. It’s a bench trial, meaning without a jury; the judge decides the facts and the law and renders a decision.
Damsky, on the other hand, has repeatedly said his post wasn’t calling for violence.
Can a university expel for social media posts?
The First Amendment protects students who post their opinions on social media, even if it’s hateful or controversial. But as previously reported, UF has a high bar to prove Damsky’s post constituted a true threat of violence, according to Kevin Goldberg, a First Amendment expert at the Freedom Forum.
That doesn’t mean that a post simply made someone afraid, but that Damsky reasonably should have known that people reading the post would be fearful.
Gainesville-based First Amendment attorney Gary Edinger said universities are given lots of latitude in court when arguing for a decision meant to maintain order. In this case, the university says Damsky’s post was disruptive to the law school’s daily functioning.
What’s next?
Damsky is seeking to be reinstated to UF’s law school. In November, Winsor did reinstate him through a court order, but a federal appeals court promptly paused Damsky’s return.
One federal appellate judge in a three-judge panel argued for the majority that although Damsky’s education is facing disruption, the university would face more harm from Damsky’s return.
“If Damsky is reinstated, there is a high likelihood that UF and its students will suffer the serious impact of continued disruption to its educational environment,” wrote Judge Elizabeth Branch of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
But Judge Kevin Newsom, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, was the sole dissenter.
“So, do I condone Damsky’s X post? No way—not even for a minute. But that’s not the question,” Newsom wrote. “The question is whether the First Amendment protects the right of a 29-year-old law student to engage in offensive off-campus political speech.”
This reporting content is supported by a partnership with Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. USA TODAY NETWORK – Florida First Amendment reporter Stephany Matat is based in Tallahassee, Fla. She can be reached at SMatat@usatodayco.com. On X: @stephanymatat.
This article originally appeared on The Gainesville Sun: White nationalist expelled from UF will argue free speech at trial
Reporting by Stephany Matat, USA TODAY NETWORK – Florida / The Gainesville Sun
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
