I am really conflicted on that,if there is something signed to protect free speech while in its previous state it already had a similar protection then it is kinda(must be?) logical to assume that this certain protection has even stricter rules now no?
Grandstanding or not,if grandstanding enforces better free speech then thumbs up.
If you can show me how this will effectively do more or how it will be enforced any better than in its current state, I can agree with your stance. So far, I see nothing current or pass that shows that the current system was some how broken where an EO would enforce or make it better. What it does do will probably be the opposite of its intention especially if its to give more conservatives free speech at public universities.
I should also mention when I say it's grandstanding I mean, there isn't anything behind it. One of the things that is very prevalent with this administration is that they continue to go to court, make policy without being prepared. How many times has this administration made policy only to get it knocked down as quick as it was done because they did not do any preparation or work to make sure it get instituted. Just throwing something out into the wild is one thing, making sure you are ready to back it up once it hit the courts is another.Last edited by Machiavellian - on 25 March 2019