Let the (minute) man speak!

In a country divided over illegal immigration, a debate about undocumented immigrants is bound to ruffle some feathers.\nIn July 2006, the Minuteman Project aimed for precisely that when it decided to hold a meeting to examine the impact of illegal immigration in Compton, Calif. But the group was denied access to the Compton Community College -- because, college officials said, special-interest groups are not allowed to use the school's facilities.\nThe decision seems uncontroversial on its surface, assuming the rule applies to all groups, regardless of their affiliations. In a lawsuit filed by the group this month, however, members claim that events featuring Louis Farrakhan (the national representative for The Nation of Islam) and Multicultural Youth Peace Summit participants were held in the same college facilities.\nThis clear instance of double standards has prompted the group to argue that its First Amendment rights were violated. It illustrates an assault on free speech in our country.\nThe Minuteman Project is an advocacy group that supports reform of American immigration laws -- more secure borders, in particular. There is no doubt the Minuteman Project is also a great source of debate in the discussion over illegal immigration.\nDisapproval for the Minuteman Project ranges from being a "vigilante" group to having connections with white-supremacy organizations. While most would agree there needs to be a serious debate about undocumented immigrants, we are wary of the group's method. In fact, this is not the group's first brush with controversy. During an event at Columbia University hosted by the group last year, protestors stormed the stage during a speech by the group's founder, Jim Gilchrist.\nDespite this wariness and though people may argue about the legitimacy of such groups, as the editorial board has pointed out before ("Columbia crash," Oct. 13, 2006), denying the group a forum to express concerns is an infringement on its free-speech rights. In fact, this only lends more power to the group's argument. In reality, this specific episode gives some credence to the Minuteman Project while seriously damaging its opponents.\nThis case is another example of the double standards that affect conservative groups, especially on liberal college campuses.\nIU is no stranger to unruly protests that do more harm than good. When conservative commentator Ann Coulter visited the campus in February 2006, she was heckled throughout her speech. David Horowitz, also a conservative, received similar treatment when he gave a controversial lecture in April 2005. Thanks to those protestors, they were successfully able to argue there is a liberal bias on campus.\nThere is a way to voice discontent about opinions that might offend, but this can only be adequately done when the other side is given a fair chance at expressing those opinions. Ultimately, these incidents test the limits of free speech. Bending the rules to ensure silencing any voices of dissent is unfair and runs contrary to our First Amendment rights.\nThe same rights that allow us to register our disapproval must also ensure freedom to express unpopular opinion. Free speech is absolute, no matter what the content or source.