STM Blog
Harvard, like all Americans, can’t be punished by the government for speaking freely – and a federal court decision upholds decades of precedents saying so
The Trump administration’s funding cuts to Harvard were deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge, emphasizing that government cannot retaliate against institutions for their views. This ruling underscores the importance of protecting free speech and dissent in American democracy.
Last Updated on October 5, 2025 by Daily News Staff
Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, Boise State University
When the federal government threatened to cancel billions in research funds from Harvard University – as it has also done to other research universities – the message was clear: Institutions that speak or think in ways elected officials dislike can expect to pay a price.
But in a recent ruling that underscored a principle at the heart of American democracy, a federal judge struck down the Trump administration’s move. The “government-initiated onslaught against Harvard was much more about promoting a governmental orthodoxy in violation of the First Amendment than about anything else,” U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs wrote.
The Harvard controversy began when the Trump administration announced plans to cut off billions in federal research funds because it objected to the university’s public positions, campus culture and some of its academic scholarship. No one contended that Harvard had mismanaged money or failed to meet grant requirements.
Instead, the White House said the school had done too little to eliminate so-called woke diversity, equity and inclusion – DEI – policies and alleged that antisemitism proliferated on campus, as evidenced by student demonstrations against Israel’s conduct in the Gaza war.
Along with the American Association of University Professors, Harvard filed suit in response to the funding cuts, arguing that the administration’s action was punitive and unconstitutional – a textbook case of retaliation. By canceling funding, the government was deploying financial pressure to silence disfavored speech. https://www.youtube.com/embed/rn77N4VGkcU?wmode=transparent&start=0 White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on April 15, 2025, spoke about President Donald Trump’s moves against Harvard.
Protection for dissent and disagreement
In striking down the funding cut, Burroughs ruled that the administration’s move violated the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, press, religion and assembly by limiting government intrusion. While government officials may disagree with Harvard’s speech – whether that means faculty scholarship, public statements or the culture of campus debate – they cannot retaliate by pulling federal support, the judge wrote.
As chair of a public policy institute devoted to strengthening deliberative democracy, I have written two books about the media and the presidency, and another about media ethics. My research traces how news institutions shape civic life and why healthy democracies rely on free expression.
The principle at work in the Harvard case is simple: Free speech protections don’t just apply to individuals in the town square or in places where public decisions are being made.
First Amendment rights extend to private institutions, even when their views or policies contravene official government opinions, and even when they receive funding from the government. Government reprisal does more than chill speech – it sets up a system where only state-approved viewpoints can flourish.
Supreme Court has seen this before
The ruling in Harvard’s favor follows a long legal tradition of Supreme Court rulings that bar the government from demanding ideological acquiescence in exchange for support.
In the case Speiser v. Randall that was decided in 1958, the court struck down a California law requiring veterans to sign loyalty oaths to receive tax exemptions. The decision created the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions, a principle that forbids government from making the receipt of a government benefit or entitlement conditional in a way that interferes with the exercise of a constitutional right.
In Perry v. Sindermann, a 1972 decision, a professor was denied reappointment at a state college after criticizing administrators. Even without tenure, the court held, the government could not retaliate against him for protected speech.
And in Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez, the court in 2001 invalidated restrictions that barred federally funded legal aid lawyers from challenging welfare laws. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that such limits “distort the legal system” by preventing some members of the bar from making arguments on behalf of their clients, while the government would face no similar restriction in promoting their own views.
Supreme Court’s contemporary signals
More recent cases show the court wrestling with the same question in new contexts.
The court’s 2013 decision in Agency for International Development v. Alliance for Open Society International struck down a requirement that nonprofits adopt a government-approved position opposing prostitution in order to receive global health funding.
The government, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, could not make program funds dependent on grant-seeking groups adopting particular political or moral beliefs. In this case, that meant the Alliance for Open Society did not have to condemn sex work in order to qualify for public health funding.
Likewise, in Janus v. AFSCME from 2018, the court struck down an Illinois law that required public employees who chose not to join a union to still pay fees to support it. The state had argued that these “fair-share fees” were necessary because unions bargain on behalf of all workers. But the court said that forcing nonmembers to pay was a form of compelled speech – subsidizing union political organizing – that abridged the First Amendment.
While the context is very different from Harvard’s funding dispute, both cases highlight the same principle: The government cannot use money – whether through subsidies, grants or mandatory fees – as a way to compel or suppress expression. These rulings show that the First Amendment protections apply to government funding and policy questions that quietly shape who gets heard and who does not.
Long history of retaliation
While American myth celebrates the idea that the United States welcomes dissent, the government has a history of punishing protesters.
The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 criminalized criticism of the federal government. During World War I, the Espionage and Sedition Acts were used to imprison activists and silence newspapers. In the 1950s, Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s crusade against alleged communists extended to universities, with faculty losing jobs and having their careers destroyed.
In each of those episodes, dissent was framed as dangerous to national security or social stability. And in each case, the tools of government – whether criminal law, congressional investigations or funding threats – were used to discipline voices that strayed from the party line. The impulse to punish institutions for perceived ideological deviance is part of a recurring American story.
What’s distinctive today is how the tactic has been folded into the culture wars.
Where earlier generations of politicians used criminal prosecution or loyalty oaths, the contemporary fight often plays out in budget spreadsheets. Defund public radio. Cut university budgets. Zero out grants to the arts.
These are not just fiscal decisions; they are symbolic moves aimed at disciplining institutions seen by conservatives as too liberal or too critical.
Why this matters beyond the courts
The latest ruling may protect Harvard in this instance, but the larger conflict is not going away.
The legal decision confirms that retaliation violates the First Amendment, but political leaders may continue to test the boundaries. And among the public, the idea that universities should play along with official doctrine in exchange for continued government funding may eventually gain traction. That possibility feels especially real given Trump’s promises, echoed by Vice President JD Vance and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, to wield federal power against universities and civic groups they portray – often inaccurately – as leftist, radical or violent.
A society where public funding flows only to institutions aligned with those in power is not a free society. It’s one where government can shape the landscape of knowledge and debate to its own ends.
The Harvard decision offers a reminder: The First Amendment is not just about the right to speak without fear of jail. It’s also about ensuring that the government cannot punish speech indirectly by threatening livelihoods and institutions. That’s why this case matters to the future of free expression in American democracy.
Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin, Frank and Bethine Church Endowed Chair of Public Affairs, Boise State University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Link: https://stmdailynews.com/%f0%9f%93%9c-who-created-blogging-a-look-back-at-the-birth-of-the-blog/
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Knowledge
How Water Towers Work: The Simple System That Keeps Water Flowing in American Cities
Learn how water towers work in the United States, why they are so tall, and how gravity helps cities maintain water pressure and emergency water supplies.
How Water Towers Work
Water towers are one of the most recognizable pieces of infrastructure across the United States. Rising above towns, suburbs, and cities, these elevated tanks quietly perform a vital function every day: maintaining water pressure and storing emergency water for local communities.
Although they may look simple, water towers are an essential part of modern municipal water systems and remain one of the most reliable ways to deliver water to homes and businesses.
The Basic Science Behind Water Towers
Water towers work using a simple principle of physics: gravity.
Water from treatment plants or underground wells is pumped into a storage tank located high above the ground—typically between 100 and 200 feet tall. Because the tank is elevated, gravity naturally pushes the water downward through the city’s pipeline network.
This gravitational force creates the water pressure needed to supply homes, businesses, irrigation systems, and fire hydrants throughout the community.
Most residential plumbing systems in the United States operate best at 40 to 60 PSI (pounds per square inch), which water towers can easily provide through elevation alone.
Why Water Towers Are Built So Tall
The height of a water tower determines how much pressure it can create. Engineers use a common rule:
For example, a water tower standing 120 feet tall can generate roughly 50 PSI of pressure—perfect for delivering water throughout a residential neighborhood.
Why Cities Still Use Water Towers
While modern pumping systems could theoretically move water through pipes continuously, water towers provide several major advantages that make them a preferred design in many municipal systems.
- Stable Water Pressure – Water towers maintain consistent pressure even during peak usage times.
- Energy Efficiency – Pumps can refill towers overnight when electricity demand is lower.
- Emergency Water Supply – If power fails, gravity can continue delivering water.
- Fire Protection – Fire hydrants depend on strong, immediate water pressure.
The Daily Fill-and-Use Cycle
Water towers typically operate on a daily cycle based on community demand.
- Night: Pumps refill the tower while water demand is low.
- Morning: Water levels drop as residents shower and prepare for the day.
- Daytime: Businesses and homes continue drawing water from the tower.
- Evening: The system begins refilling the tank for the next day.
How Much Water Can a Tower Store?
Water towers come in many sizes depending on the population they serve.
- Small towns: 50,000–300,000 gallons
- Suburban communities: 500,000–1 million gallons
- Larger urban systems: up to 2 million gallons or more
Even a single tower holding one million gallons can supply thousands of homes for several hours during peak demand or emergencies.
Modern Technology Inside Water Towers
Today’s water towers are equipped with advanced monitoring systems that help utilities maintain safe and reliable water supplies.
- Digital water level sensors
- Automated pump controls
- Water quality monitoring
- Protective interior coatings
- Regular inspections and maintenance
Landmarks in the American Skyline
Many cities turn their water towers into local landmarks by painting them with city names, mascots, or community slogans. Some towns even design towers shaped like giant objects such as fruit, coffee cups, or sports balls.
Despite their distinctive appearance, water towers remain one of the simplest and most reliable engineering solutions for delivering clean water to millions of Americans every day.
Next time you see a water tower rising above a town skyline, remember: it’s not just a landmark—it’s the gravity-powered system that keeps water flowing.
Related External Coverage
For more information about how water towers and municipal water systems work, explore the following resources:
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Drinking Water Regulations
- American Water Works Association – Water Storage and Water Towers
- HowStuffWorks – How Water Distribution Systems Work
- U.S. Geological Survey – Drinking Water and Groundwater Basics
- U.S. Department of Energy – How Water Towers Work
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
unknown
The Unfavorable Semicircle Mystery: The YouTube Channel That Uploaded Tens of Thousands of Cryptic Videos
In 2015, the YouTube channel Unfavorable Semicircle gained attention for its enigmatic and abundant video uploads, totaling over 70,000 before its deletion in 2016. Theories about its purpose vary, from automated content generation to digital art experimentation, leaving its intent unresolved.
In the vast digital landscape of the internet, strange phenomena occasionally emerge that leave investigators, tech enthusiasts, and everyday viewers scratching their heads. One of the most puzzling cases appeared in 2015, when a mysterious YouTube channel called Unfavorable Semicircle began uploading an astonishing number of cryptic videos.
Within months, the channel had published tens of thousands of bizarre clips, many of which seemed random, incomprehensible, and visually chaotic. But as internet detectives began analyzing the content more closely, they discovered that these videos might not have been random at all.
The Sudden Appearance of an Internet Mystery
The Unfavorable Semicircle channel reportedly appeared in March 2015, with its first uploads arriving in early April.
Almost immediately, the channel began publishing videos at an incredible pace. Observers estimated that the account uploaded thousands of videos per week, sometimes multiple videos per minute. By the time the channel disappeared in early 2016, researchers believed it had uploaded well over 70,000 videos, possibly far more.
The scale alone made the project seem impossible for a human to manage manually.
Strange Visuals and Cryptic Titles
Most of the videos shared similar characteristics:
- Extremely short or very long runtime
- Abstract visuals such as flashing colors, static, or distorted imagery
- Little or no audio, or heavily distorted sounds
- Titles made of random characters, symbols, or numbers
To casual viewers, the videos looked like pure digital noise. However, online investigators suspected something more deliberate was happening.
Hidden Images Discovered
The mystery deepened when researchers began extracting individual frames from some videos.
When thousands of frames from certain clips were stitched together, the results sometimes formed coherent images. One of the most famous examples involved a video titled “LOCK.” While the footage appeared chaotic at first, combining the frames revealed a recognizable composite image.
This discovery suggested the videos were carefully constructed rather than random uploads.
Theories About the Channel’s Purpose
Because the creator never explained the project, several theories emerged across Reddit, YouTube, and internet forums.
Automated Experiment
Many believe the channel was created using automated software that generated and uploaded content at scale.
Alternate Reality Game (ARG)
Some viewers suspected the channel might be part of a hidden puzzle or digital scavenger hunt.
Encrypted Communication
Others compared the channel to Cold War “numbers stations,” suggesting the videos could contain coded messages.
Digital Art Project
Another theory suggests the channel was an experimental art project exploring algorithms, data, and visual noise.
Despite years of investigation, no single explanation has been confirmed.
Why the Channel Disappeared
In February 2016, YouTube removed the channel, reportedly due to spam or automated activity violations.
By that time, the channel had already become a minor internet legend. Fortunately, some researchers managed to archive a large portion of the videos before they disappeared.
Even today, archived clips continue to circulate online as investigators attempt to decode them.
Other Mysterious YouTube Channels
The Unfavorable Semicircle mystery is not the only strange case on YouTube.
One well-known example is Webdriver Torso, a channel that uploaded hundreds of thousands of videos showing red and blue rectangles with simple beeping sounds. Internet speculation ran wild before Google eventually confirmed it was an internal YouTube testing account.
Another example is AETBX, which posts distorted visuals and unusual audio that some viewers believe contain hidden patterns or encoded information.
These cases highlight how automation, experimentation, and creativity can sometimes blur the line between technology and mystery.
A Digital Mystery That Remains Unsolved
Nearly a decade later, the true purpose behind Unfavorable Semicircle remains unknown.
Was it a sophisticated experiment? A piece of algorithmic art? Or simply an automated test that accidentally captured the internet’s imagination?
Whatever the explanation, the channel stands as a reminder that even in a world filled with billions of videos and endless information, the internet can still produce mysteries that challenge our understanding of technology.
Why Internet Mysteries Still Fascinate Us
Stories like Unfavorable Semicircle capture attention because they combine technology, creativity, and the unknown. They invite people from around the world to collaborate, analyze patterns, and search for meaning hidden in the noise.
And sometimes, the most intriguing part of the mystery is that the answer may never fully be known.
Related Coverage & Further Reading
- Atlas Obscura – The Unsettling Mystery of the Creepiest Channel on YouTube
- Her Campus – Top 5 Most Obscure Internet Mysteries
- Medium – Unfavorable Semicircle: The YouTube Mystery No One Can Solve
- Gazette Review – Top 10 Strangest YouTube Channels Ever
- Decoding the Unknown – Unfavorable Semicircle YouTube Mystery Archive
- Wikipedia – Unfavorable Semicircle
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Bridge
Celebrating International Women’s Day!
International Women’s Day is celebrated globally on March 8th to honor women’s achievements and promote gender equality, originating from a 1908 march in New York for better rights.
Last Updated on March 7, 2026 by Daily News Staff
International Women’s Day is a global celebration that honors the achievements of women and highlights the progress still to be made in the fight for gender equality. On this day, people around the world come together to recognize the amazing contributions of women everywhere and to rally for greater gender equity in all areas of life.
The origins of International Women’s Day can be traced back to 1908, when 15,000 women marched through the streets of New York City to demand better working conditions and the right to vote. Since then, the celebration has grown to be an international event, with more than 100 countries recognizing the day. The United Nations even declared March 8th as International Women’s Day in 1975, to honor the struggles of women around the world.
This year’s International Women’s Day theme is #ChooseToChallenge, meaning that everyone is encouraged to call out gender bias and inequality when they see it. We’re also encouraged to celebrate women’s achievements, support each other, and take action for equality.
It’s important to recognize the progress we’ve made in terms of gender equality, but we still have a long way to go. International Women’s Day serves as a reminder that we must continue to fight for gender equality in all areas of life. Let’s use this day to honor the contributions of women around the world, and to continue the fight for a more equitable world.
https://www.internationalwomensday.com/
https://stmdailynews.com/category/science/
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
