The debate over hosting controversial speakers shouldn't just be a matter of intellectual freedom, but also about how libraries naturally create social space in the urban environment.
We can get philosophical and sociological all we want, but the Courts hold (in the United States, at least) that resources paid for with public money have to be made available in a viewpoint-neutral fashion. I don't know about what goes on on college campuses when they give in to various mobs and "de-platform" speakers/performers, but public libraries can't get away with that without worrying about a (probably losing) lawsuit. If a public library in the US has a bookable meeting room/space and admins block usage to some clique of thinkers or another on grounds of viewpoint, they'd better have a good City attorney. If they do it wrong, they even flirt with a Civil Rights case.
We can get philosophical and sociological all we want, but the Courts hold (in the United States, at least) that resources paid for with public money have to be made available in a viewpoint-neutral fashion. I don't know about what goes on on college campuses when they give in to various mobs and "de-platform" speakers/performers, but public libraries can't get away with that without worrying about a (probably losing) lawsuit. If a public library in the US has a bookable meeting room/space and admins block usage to some clique of thinkers or another on grounds of viewpoint, they'd better have a good City attorney. If they do it wrong, they even flirt with a Civil Rights case.
https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1003/neutrality-speech
https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1028/viewpoint-discrimination
https://www.justice.gov/crt/title-ii-civil-rights-act-public-accommodations
Thank you for introducing another dimension into the library debate!
Thanks! We were surprised to find few LIS writers had made use of Lefebvre, and certainly not in regards to this issue.