Board of Regents v. New Left Education Project

1972-01-24

Headline: Campus free-speech challenge is returned to the appeals court after the Justices find they lack jurisdiction, vacating the three-judge court’s injunction and blocking direct Supreme Court review.

Holding: The Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the direct appeal because the three-judge district court was improperly convened, vacated the lower court’s judgment, and sent the case to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings.

Real World Impact:

Blocks direct Supreme Court review; appeal must proceed in the Fifth Circuit.
Vacates the three-judge court’s judgment and sends case back for a new decree.
Leaves the constitutionality of the campus speech rules undecided by the Supreme Court.

Topics: campus free speech, university rules, federal appeals process, court jurisdiction

Summary

Background

The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System sued the New Left Education Project and individuals in a Texas court to stop distribution of a newspaper and solicitations on the Austin campus except as the Regents’ rules allowed. Those defendants filed a federal suit claiming the Regents’ rules abridged their First Amendment rights. A three-judge district court heard the federal case, allowed other groups to join, and granted summary judgment declaring two Regents’ rules (§§6.11, 6.12) unconstitutional and enjoining their enforcement.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court considered whether it could hear a direct appeal from a three-judge court order. The Court explained that direct review is available only when a state statute or regulation has statewide application or reflects a statewide policy. It found the Regents’ rulemaking power and the challenged rules applied to only a fraction of Texas institutions (naming Austin, El Paso, and Arlington among three four-year schools listed) and not to the many other senior and junior colleges in Texas. Because the rules were not matters of statewide concern, the three-judge court was improperly convened. The Court therefore vacated the district court’s judgment and instructed that the case proceed to the Court of Appeals for further action.

Real world impact

The Supreme Court did not decide whether the campus rules violate the First Amendment. Instead, the case must continue in the federal appeals court, and the lower court must enter a fresh decree. Justices Powell and Rehnquist did not take part in the decision.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Douglas dissented, arguing the university system involved many campuses across Texas and presented a statewide concern about campus speech, and he would have reached the merits.