Source: https://www.thefire.org/free-speech-at-stake-at-warren-county-community-college/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 02:05:17+00:00

Document:
There is little question that Daly’s speech is protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court stated in the case of Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968), that “statements by public officials on matters of public concern must be accorded First Amendment protection….” In general, since Pickering, the Supreme Court has held repeatedly that public employees cannot be terminated or disciplined solely because their speech on matters of public concern (see Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378, and Waters v. Churchill, 511 U.S. 661). Daly, an employee of a public college, is entitled to First Amendment protections when opining on matters of a public concern. It would be almost impossible to argue that a statement concerning the Iraq war, a subject in the headlines on a daily basis, is not a matter of public concern. Although Daly advocates a rather extreme position (suggesting that troops should murder their superior officers), speech must be more than merely offensive to fall outside the realm of protected speech (see Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, and Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397). The content of the e-mail, even though many people would view it as highly offensive, is related to a matter of public concern and thus is entitled to the full protection afforded by the First Amendment.
It is also interesting to note how censorship knows no political boundaries. This incident closely mirrors the case of Jihad Daniel at William Paterson University. Daniel, also responding to an e-mail advertising a public event, referred to homosexuality as a “perversion” and was later reprimanded for violating the Interim State of New Jersey Policy Prohibiting Discrimination, Harassment or Hostile Environment in the Workplace. When this story broke, conservative pundits were quick to come to Daniel’s defense—just as when Daly’s story broke, liberal groups were quick to defend his statements. What is the moral of the story? Censorship can be easily used by authorities regardless of political ideology. The only answer is for everyone, regardless of political persuasion, to denounce censorship no matter what the content of the speech.
Daly’s speech (much like Daniel’s speech) is without a doubt protected by the First Amendment, and this single incident does not even come close to meeting the standard necessary to establish a “hostile environment.” The WCCC Board of Trustees should make the correct choice tonight by affirming a commitment to freedom of speech and openly dismissing the calls to investigate and terminate John Daly.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.