George,

The Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression will soon be awarding its Jefferson Muzzles. I assume that the University of Virginia will be one of the recipients of a Muzzle for its treatment of Dena Bowers. Dena Bowers would still be an employee of the University if she had not expressed certain views. This is a clear case of punishing free speech.

To see this case clearly we must cut through the distracting tangle of details about who sent the NAACP report to whom, official signatures and the like. The fundamental fact is that the communication that Dena Bowers sent contained content that the University Administration did not want disseminated. If this communication had been a report of bird sightings from an ornithological society or a recipe from a cooking club, it would have gone unnoticed by the Administration. Indeed, there are probably dozens of such communications going through the UVA e-mail system each day without notice. But a communication containing a NAACP study that pointed out what might happen if the Administration changed to a new pay structure did cause extraordinary reaction from the Administration.

By questioning Dena Bowers about this communication, the Administration was acting to suppress her right to free speech. Anything that was said by Bowers during the course of this questioning is "tainted" and should not be used against her since Bowers' Constitutional rights had already been violated. This is the legal principle of "fruit of the poisonous tree". (Although this principle is used in cases of illegal search and seizure, it would seem to apply in this violation of rights case as well.)

Thomas Jefferson's University should, of all institutions, protect the rights contained in the Bill of Rights, not violate them.

David RePass (electronic mail, January 10, 2006)