Federal court sides with conservative students in dispute over ‘anti-communist’ campus fliers

After a conservative student group successfully sued their California community college for taking down “anti-communist” fliers posted on campus, a federal court has denied the school’s appeal.

The decision issued Thursday by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an injunction against Clovis Community College, which had appealed the October ruling by a federal judge.

The case stems from a 2021 dispute in which several fliers were posted by students belonging to Young Americans for Freedom, a conservative student group, and were subsequently taken down by administrators after they received complaints about their content.

The Fresno Bee reported the fliers displayed “anti-communist” sentiments. The school’s flier policy had prohibited “inappropriate or [offensive] language or themes,” according to court documents.

“The district court did not err in determining that there was likely a substantial amount of protected speech that would be potentially chilled by the Flyer Policy,” the appellate decision read.

The school’s policy was later modified in 2022 to remove the clause.

Alejandro Flores, the lead plaintiff and former YAF president, reacted to the decision in a statement made to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a nonprofit that advocates for free speech and represented the plaintiffs in the case.

“The news from the Ninth Circuit is a huge victory for free speech,” Flores said. “But this isn’t the end of our legal battle against the school. We’re ready to keep fighting so that we can hold the college accountable for censoring speech they disagree with.”

In a statement, the college’s Office of the General Counsel said the ruling only addressed the flier policy of the school, which had been changed months before the initial ruling.

“The campus continues to respect the Free Speech rights of all students,” the statement read. “Nothing in the opinion addresses any of the allegations against the District employees.

“The District will continue to defend its position as deemed necessary, given the allegations presented by the Plaintiffs,” it concluded.