Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth

Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously (9–0) on March 22, 2000, that officials at public colleges and universities may impose mandatory student fees as long as they distribute the proceeds to student organizations in a viewpoint-neutral manner. The decision validated the common practice of administrators at most public institutions of higher learning while providing guidance for compliance with the U.S. Constitution.

Facts of the case

The case concerned the University of Wisconsin System’s practice of imposing a mandatory student fee, a portion of which was used by university officials to fund student activities, including various political and ideological groups. Some of the students objected to this practice, arguing that they were being forced to subsidize the promotion of controversial viewpoints with which they disagreed. In particular, the students claimed that the First Amendment precluded such forced subsidization. Outside the context of higher education, particularly in disputes concerning labour unions in education, the court had ruled in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) that individuals may not be compelled to support political and ideological positions with which they disagree. The students sought to extend the same principle to higher education.

A federal district court, in an unpublished order, agreed with the students, and a sharply divided Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s judgment.

Britannica Quiz

All-American History Quiz

The Supreme Court’s ruling

In a unanimous ruling, authored by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded in favour of the university. Kennedy and five other justices agreed that as long as the fee allocation system was viewpoint-neutral, meaning that funds were distributed in a manner that did not favour one group over another, officials at state colleges and universities could impose mandatory student fees and use the proceeds to fund student organizations. Three other justices concurred in the judgment.

Southworth remains the cornerstone of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on funding student organizations in the United States. Although its basic holding is largely uncontroversial, there is still much dispute about the meaning of the viewpoint-neutral standard.