facts present an interesting question on the issue of free speech although the central issue

The facts of the case in UZUEGBUNAM v. PRECZEWSKI are set out in an article by Adam Liptak in the accompanying link to an article dated August 17, 2020: The facts present an interesting question on the issue of free speech although the central issue of the case focuses on the legal question of what is referred to as “mootness”. Your task is not to address that issue, rather read , carefully, the facts as laid out by Liptak concerning the”free speech zone” issue . It is that question alone to which you are to address your research and conclusions, if any. In your research journey you may draw corollaries from history, political science, literature, film and other commentary to draw your conclusions. Aside from the issue presented as a legal question –that is to say whether the case is moot or not is irrelevant to your research – a broader issue is at stake as to the rule sought to be enforced and what the appellant was told by law enforcement. What happened afterwards is irrelevant, examine the rule as it existed. You may ask yourself several questions as it is applicable to the 1st Amendment generally, college campuses and free speech codes and , even, whether MSU has such restrictions. We live in a time of conflicting views resulting in actions which may be contrary to our nature and to the Constitution. Your assignment is to examine the concept of free speech through the lens of law, history and relevant disciplines. In your research journey you may draw corollaries from history, political science, literature, film and other commentary to draw your conclusions. The issue here is a mix of law and other disciplines so a grounding in legal research is not required. The question to examine as subtext is whether we are on a collision course in terms of constitutionally protected rights and the intent of the Framers versus a society today confronted with threats from within…and without.