Legal obstacles loom

I fear that the article, “Experts question legality of ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill,” will give readers an incorrect impression on the likelihood of a successful First Amendment challenge to two bills that would limit what can be taught in Florida schools. Law professors, like the two who are quoted in the article, tend to be optimistic about such challenges. But as one who taught First Amendment law for decades, I don’t share their optimism.

The Supreme Court, across ideological lines, has been very protective of free speech for many years. But there are exceptions, notably with regard to the rights of students and government employees, including teachers, when they speak as government employees.

In addition to legal precedent, common sense supports the conclusions that a student has no First Amendment right to have a particular subject taught or discussed in school, and a teacher has no First Amendment right to teach outside a prescribed curriculum. The two bills in question, which impose restrictions that have generated understandable opposition, should persuade even the most ardent advocates of freedom of speech that the First Amendment cannot be sensibly understood to give teachers the right to teach whatever they want.

Professor Caroline Mala Corbin would likely respond to me by arguing, as she is quoted in your article, “To completely eliminate an entire topic of discussion ... really signals hostility to an idea.” No it doesn’t. Barring a topic avoids the problem of viewpoint discrimination.

Marc Rohr, Fort Lauderdale

The writer is professor of law emeritus at Nova Southeastern University’s Shepard Broad College of Law.