‘Free’ speech for thee
Free speech comes with a price on college campuses — for now.
In May 2024, Tayah Lackie graduated from St. Cloud State University (SCSU) with a degree in accounting completely debt-free. She had worked part-time and earned college credit while still in high school through Minnesota’s Postsecondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) program.
So she was shocked to learn that as an SCSU student, she had been unknowingly funding the political activism of a group called Students United, which was pushing for (among other things) total student debt cancellation with a website titled, “FCK STUDENT DEBT.”
“If a student wants to [support Students United] of their own free will, that’s absolutely okay, but taking my money and using it to fund private political speech and not telling me about it, that’s a big deal,” Lackie told Thinking Minnesota.
Every student in the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system pays $0.80 per course credit to Students United, a left-leaning advocacy group representing more than 65,000 students across the state. But Lackie says she had never heard of Students United until just before graduation despite paying their fees each semester.
“This is happening to every single college student in the Minnesota State university system across the state of Minnesota,” says James Dickey, senior counsel at the Upper Midwest Law Center (UMLC). “Many, I would say the vast majority, have no idea they’re being forced to subsidize an organization that has taken very far-left political positions.”
Lackie filed a lawsuit against her alma mater on May 9, 2024, just days after graduating, with the help of UMLC and the Liberty Justice Center. Because students can’t decline membership in Students United, the complaint argues that the state university system is violating students’ First Amendment right to freedom of political association.
Students United (formerly known as the Minnesota State University Student Association) was formed in 1967. Since then, it’s been the “sole representative of state university students in Minnesota” under state law, representing every student at the Bemidji, Mankato, Metropolitan (St. Paul/Minneapolis), Moorhead, St. Cloud, Southwest (Marshall), and Winona state universities.
With 65,000 students paying $0.80 per credit, Students United receives roughly 76 percent of its funding from student fees — or approximately $922,000 (based on a Fiscal Year 2024 projection).
“She didn’t take out any loans. And while she’s making all these sacrifices and beating the odds and graduating debt-free — something nearly impossible today — Students United is taking money from her to push the completely opposite message,” says Allie Howell, trial & appellate counsel at UMLC.
Universities in other states may require a student activity fee — even one dedicated to political activism — but most make sure that political funds are shared evenly, according to Howell.
“The Supreme Court has said that’s okay as long as it’s viewpoint-neutral and everyone gets a bite of the apple. What’s unique here is that the money is only going to Students United. There’s no chance for students to say, ‘Hey, I would actually prefer that my money go somewhere else.’ That’s pretty unique to Minnesota,” says Howell.
The case resembles another political freedom of speech case, also tried by the Liberty Justice Center: Janus v. AFSCME, which ruled in 2018 that forcing non-government public employees to pay union dues as a condition of employment is unconstitutional.
“The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Janus v. AFSCME decision freed millions of public employees across the country from being forced to subsidize government unions’ political agendas in order to keep their job,” American Experiment policy fellow Catrin Wigfall wrote of the decision.
Could Lackie v. Students United be the country’s next landmark case restoring freedom of political speech — this time to college students?
“There are a lot of things I can’t do anything about in our society. This was something I could actually get involved in and try to make a difference,” Lackie says.
Despite her frustration, Lackie was hesitant to take action against her college. She knew the case would get significant media attention, and with graduation fast approaching and her new career just around the corner, there was a risk associated with putting her name on a politically charged lawsuit. Ultimately, she decided it was worth it.
“I came to the conclusion that if my name is what’s needed to move things in the right direction, then that’s what it was going to take. And I’m okay with that.”