Free speech advocates question UNLV’s use of public expression area for debate

The public expression area UNLV designated for the final presidential debate Wednesday did not see much use throughout the day or early evening.

An hour before the debate’s scheduled start time, the event’s official “free expression area,” located near Paradise Road and Naples Drive, was almost deserted. Only about 20 people milled about the fenced parking lot that easily could hold 1,000 or more.

Attorney Maggie McLetchie, who represents the Las Vegas Review-Journal, said this is indicative of a growing trend to make free speech zones “small and out of the way.”

“As a trend, we’ve gotten too carried away with pushing free speech into the corner,” McLetchie said.

Kim Borghese, Nevada Green Party co-chair, delivered a speech on her party’s platform to a near-empty house. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein was not invited to participate in any of the debates. Borghese was allowed 10 minutes on Wednesday for her speech.

“To be told the only area I’m allowed to speak in is this area. … It’s not free speech; it’s restricted speech,” she said. “I feel like there’s actually a purposeful blacking out by the media. They barely say Jill’s name.”

McLetchie pointed to the Bureau of Land Management’s “First Amendment Area” during Cliven Bundy’s battle against the federal government in 2014 as an example of the restrictive trend.

“The BLM was really misguided about how they handled it,” she said. “If we keep relegating free speech to smaller spaces further away from the action, the less we as a society obviously honor free speech.”

It’s also a trend on college campuses, according to Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

A 2013 study by the nonprofit organization, whose mission is to defend and sustain individual rights at America’s colleges and universities, found that roughly one in six of America’s top colleges used free speech zones to quarantine free speech.

“UNLV, like too many colleges around the country, embraces the idea that people need to be protected from speech,” Review-Journal Managing Editor Glenn Cook said. “The university’s position should be precisely the opposite. It is expression itself that needs protection.”

According to Google Maps, the UNLV zone was about a 12-minute walk from the Thomas &Mack Center, the location of the debate. It took a Review-Journal reporter, however, between 15 and 20 minutes to walk to the area.

“It’s 10 football fields away,” Cohn said. “Part of the idea of protesting is the idea to reach the targeted audience. It’s hard to reach people in and out of the debate when you’re that far away.”

Vince Alberta, the senior associate vice president of brand marketing at UNLV, told the Review-Journal on Tuesday that the expression area was the “most direct line of sight” to the Thomas &Mack Center. But he added that free speech is allowed anywhere on campus, as long as it does not interfere with business operations or is not a threat to public safety.

Cohn argues that having a “clear line of sight” is irrelevant. He compared it to the possibility of having a clear line of sight to the Strip from several points across the Las Vegas Valley.

“That’s not the test,” Cohn said. “It doesn’t mean you’re adequately close enough.”

McLetchie added that in light of how strongly people on both sides of the election feel, it’s “especially important” that their First Amendment rights are protected.

Cohn said he hopes the Legislature makes abolishing free speech zones a priority in the next session.

“Using a presidential debate, which is emblematic of the free exchange of ideas, to stifle citizens’ speech on a public university is in many ways the ultimate irony,” Cohn said.

Contact Natalie Bruzda at nbruzda@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3897. Follow @NatalieBruzda on Twitter. Contact Michael Scott Davidson at sdavidson@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3861. Follow @DavidsonLVRJ on Twitter.