Wisconsin fee case goes to high court

The dispute concerns whether the University of Wisconsin at Madison -or any state school - can force students to pay "activity fees" that go, in part, to groups engaging in political advocacy that students may oppose, on topics such as abortion or environmentalism.

Provoking dozens of "friend of the court" briefs, the case is significant mostly for campuses, where ideas are exchanged and society's dilemmas debated. But an eventual ruling could touch on recurring controversies about government funding at all levels for free expression and the arts.

The case before the court began when Wisconsin law student Scott Southworth objected that his student-activity fees were indirectly supporting several liberal Wisconsin student groups, including the UW Greens, the Campus Women's Center and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Campus Center.

"It was a gut-level thing," Southworth said, explaining that he opposed "being forced to support the propagation of opinions that I disagree with - on an ideological basis, a political basis and especially a religious basis."

Many public universities collect student-activity fees that are funneled to campus organizations for their various projects and pursuits, and as a result, several other states have joined the case.

The University of Michigan Student Assembly collects $5.69 from students each semester to fund students groups.

One "friend of the court" brief, signed by 15 states, defended student funding for campus groups by arguing that "these programs further educational goals by fostering 'a marketplace of ideas' . . . (and) exposing students to a variety of viewpoints."

Scores of other education, labor, and political groups have also jumped in with amicus briefs. The Virginia-based American Center for Law and Justice asserts that forcing someone to pay fees for political advocacy he opposes "is a fundamental violation of virtually every right in the First Amendment"

The American Civil Liberties Union, on the other hand, contends that Southworth and his fellow protesters "are in the same position as taxpayers who object to the use of a municipal park for a controversial political rally. They can certainly make their objection known, and even use the forum as their vehicle for doing so, but they may not express their displeasure by withholding taxes."

Southworth, a native of Wisconsin and the first in his family to go to the state's flagship university, said he first tried to avoid paying the 1995-96 annual student fees of $331.50 by writing a letter to the school administration. When he received no response, Southworth sued along with two other students, alleging that their First Amendment rights of free speech, association and religion had been violated. They won in lower courts.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, whose ruling the justices will review this week, traced Southworth's right to avoid paying the fees to a line of cases upholding the "right not to speak." The Supreme Court's decision could affect student fees at Michigan, which is under the jurisdiction of the 6th Circuit Court.

The court relied, for example, on two past Supreme Court decisions, one that stopped a government employees' union from spending dues on ideological causes its members opposed and another that prohibited a state bar association from using dues to pay for political activities with which some members disagreed.

In its appeal, the University of Wisconsin argues that it is not forcing anyone to "speak" through the activity fees, but rather ensuring a public forum for all students.

11-09-99