Two students were expelled from the University of Oklahoma this week after a video of them leading a racist chant went viral. The response from David Boren, the president of the university, was swift and decisive the video went public Sunday night, and by midday Tuesday the university had announced the expulsion.

[Read the students' apologies.]

The incident raised heated questions about race relations and how to balance free speech with protection from discrimination and harassment. Many applauded Borens strong stance as a good means to ensure the campus wasnt a racially hostile place. But others cautioned he had not given sufficient consideration to the students First Amendment rights.

College officials have to carefully navigate those competing claims.

Olabisi Okubadejo, a lawyer who specializes in higher education issues in Ballard Spahrs Baltimore office, writes about the tensions for colleges trying to keep their campuses inclusive even when theres divisive speech:

The announcement of the University of Oklahomas recent decision to expel two fraternity members who allegedly were involved in chanting a racist anthem on video has ignited widespread discussion at educational institutions nationwide.

At issue, in large part, is the tension that often arises when student organizations engage in race-based conduct on the one hand, many students and faculty are offended and outraged by the behavior, while on the other hand, perpetrators and individual rights groups vocally claim that the speech is constitutionally protected.

Educational institutions are caught in the middle, as they grapple with how to meet dueling obligations under the First Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial harassment.

The U.S. Department of Educations Office for Civil Rights (OCR) in its published guidance to schools makes clear that the mere offensiveness of speech, standing alone, is insufficient to establish a racially hostile environment on campus.

Instead, to constitute harassment, when viewed from the perspective of a reasonable person, the speech must be sufficiently serious to deny or limit a students ability to participate in the schools educational program.

See the original post:

Lawyer: OU had to balance free speech and protection from racism