The Daily Signal - #551: Christian Student on Why He’s Suing Chicago Over Free Speech

Episode Date: September 25, 2019

All they wanted to do was share the gospel message—and they’d been doing it for years in downtown Chicago. But this time, the four Christian college students were shut down by law enforcement. Now, they’re suing the city of Chicago, saying their First Amendment rights to free speech have been violated. Today, one of those students, Matthew Swart, joins the podcast for an exclusive interview about what he believes is at stake in this case. Plus: Great Britain’s opposition party wants to ban private schools. We discuss. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the Daily Signal podcast for Wednesday, September 25th. I'm Kate Tringo. And I'm Daniel Davis. All they wanted to do was share the gospel message, and they've been doing it for years in downtown Chicago. But this time, the four Christian College students were shut down by police. Now they're suing the city of Chicago, saying their First Amendment rights to free speech have been violated. Today, I'll speak with one of those students, Matthew Swart,

in an exclusive interview about what he believes is at stake in this case. Plus, Great Britain's opposition party wants to ban private schooling. We'll discuss. And if you're enjoying this podcast, please be sure to leave a review or a five-star rating on iTunes and encourage others to subscribe. Now, onto our top news. In a speech to the UN Tuesday, President Donald Trump spoke out against globalism. Via Bloomberg's TikTok, here's what he said. Take pride in your country.

If you want democracy, hold up. on to your sovereignty, and if you want peace, love your nation. Wise leaders always put the good of their own people and their own country. First, the future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots. The future belongs to sovereign and independent nations who protect their citizens, respect their neighbors, and honor the differences that make each country special and unique. The president also had tough words for Iran via BBC World. Hoping to free itself from sanctions, the regime has escalated its violent and unprovoked aggression.

In response to Iran's recent attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, we just imposed the highest level of sanctions. on Iran's central bank and sovereign wealth fund. All nations have a duty to act. No responsible government should subsidize Iran's bloodlust. As long as Iran's menacing behavior continues, sanctions will not be lifted. President Trump is fending off allegations that he used U.S. foreign aid money as leverage in order to get dirt on Joe Biden.

In a surprise announcement on Tuesday, the president authorized the release of a complete transcript of a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which the president reportedly mentioned the former vice president and his son, Hunter. Shortly before that call, Trump ordered $400 million in military aid to Ukraine to be put on hold. He says he wanted to speak to Zelensky about corruption in Ukraine in order to protect the aid money. The transcript of the phone call is expected to be released Wednesday. Representative John Lewis, Democrat from Georgia and a longtime civil rights leader, spoke out against President Trump in a passionate speech on the House floor Tuesday via C-SPAN. We took an oath to protect this nation against all domestic intimates and foreign intimates. Sometime I'm afraid to go to sleep for fear that I will wake up and not democracy will be gone, will be gone.

and never returned. Every term, this administration demonstrate complete disdain and disregard for ethics, for the law, and for the Constitution. They have lied on the oath. They refuse to account for their action and appear before legislative body who have the constitutional right to inquire about their activities. Lewis continued, I believe, I truly believe, the time to begin impeachment proceedings against this president has come.

To delay or to do otherwise would betray the foundation of our democracy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Meanwhile, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is calling for a formal impeachment inquiry regarding President Trump. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday said he, never received an explanation about why that military aid money for Ukraine was being held up. Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, according to the Hill, McConnell said he spoke to the secretaries of state and defense and actively pushed for that money. He said, quote, the good news was it finally happened. I have no idea what precipitated the delay. Senator Bernie Sanders has a new

proposal out to tax the wealthy. He wants to tax the top 180,000 American households, those with a net worth of $32 million or more. Their assets above $32 million would be taxed an additional amount ranging from half a percent to 8 percent, depending on how much they have. And with that money, Sanders aims to fund initiatives like Medicare for all, housing programs, and daycare. In a tweet about the proposal, Sanders wrote, quote, billionaires should not exist. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffered a major blow Tuesday when the UK's Supreme

Court ruled that his decision to suspend Parliament for several weeks was against the law. Johnson had defended that decision as a way to create space for the Queen to give a national speech and announce his domestic agenda. But his opponents were furious, since that decision cut short the amount of time Parliament could work on a Brexit deal before the October 31st deadline when the United Kingdom is scheduled to leave the European Union. Johnson's loss at the Supreme Court means Parliament will resume on Wednesday, giving members more time to avert Brexit. Johnson said that he disagreed with the court's ruling and refused calls to resign. Instead, he called on Parliament to agree to a national election, something they've

refused to do. Next up, we'll feature Daniel's interview with a college student fighting the city of Chicago. Tired of high taxes, fewer health care choices, and bigger government, become a part of the Heritage Foundation. We're fighting the rising tide of homegrown socialism, while developing conservative solutions that make families more free and more prosperous. Find out more at heritage.org. Well, I'm joined now by Matthew Swart. He is a sophomore at Wheaton College in Illinois, where he and three of his fellow students are suing the city of Chicago over a speech ordinance. Matthew, appreciate you calling in.

Hey, great to be here with it, Daniel. So, Matthew, not many college students end up suing a major city like Chicago, but that's exactly. what you guys are doing. Tell me how did this dispute first begin? So Daniel, myself and some students are part of an organization known as the Chicago evangelism team. We go down into the city of Chicago on Friday nights through taking a metro chain, and we share the gospel of Jesus Christ with whoever we encounter that sinners can be reconciled to God through repentance and putting their faith in Jesus Christ and be restored to a new relationship with him. So we go around the city, we talk to whoever we feel led to and eventually our activities led us into Millennium Park last year. We didn't have any issues

starting off. We would pass out different, we call them gospel tracks or small pamphlets with some information side of them. We would talk to whoever we felt led to and we started to be run into issues on December 7th of 2018. Myself and a fellow plaintiff Caden Hood were in the park on that night and we were passing out gospel tracks within the park when we were approached by a park security guard who informed us that we were not allowed to do what we were doing within the park we obeyed we stepped outside of the park and then once we were on the public sidewalk in front caden began a street preach from out front we were again approached by a security guard and told to stop i questioned him saying there was a public sidewalk i didn't understand while we were being forced to do so he told me he

was just doing his job so we obeyed about 15 minutes later another one of our fellow students another plaintiff, Jeremy Chong, arrived at the scene, and he, believing we were in our full rights to do so, began to also street breach in front of the park. We were then approached by a supervisor in the park after we requested to speak to one, who told us we were in violation of an ordinance from the city of Chicago saying that solicitation was not allowed it in the park. So this is something, maybe just for some context, this is something that's been going on for quite a while, right? I mean, disclosures for our listeners, I also am a Wheaton College alum, and I remember the Chicago Evangelism team going out every Friday night and they would do this. Is this the same kind of – are these the same practices that you guys have been doing for a long time? Yes, as far as I understand, they are.

I mean, the Chicago Evangelism team has been around for decades going down to Chicago, sharing the good news of Jesus Christ. So yes, it's absolutely a long-running organization. So before we get into the details of the dispute here, tell me a little bit about why you guys do this. So in Matthew 28 of the Bible, Jesus commands his disciples to go into all the nations, making disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Father's Son and the Holy Spirit, and commanding the disciples to teach them to obey all he's commanded. myself and my fellow students are Christians and we take this issue seriously to heart and we obey this by going to the city because we believe we've received the greatest news ever. It's something that's transformed all of our lives and we just want to share it with everyone around us. So being there's a lot of people in Millennium Park, that's why we're going there and we believe that it's an important opportunity for us. But also furthermore, maybe even anyone who's outside of the Christian faith is listening, this is a

a free speech issue that's critical to all of us. Our First Amendment specifically guarantees us the right to this type of protected speech. And it's inside of a public park, which is a quintessential public forum. So if anyone wanted to share a message within Millennium Park, the current rules the city of Chicago has in place prohibit them from doing so and are infringing upon the free speech of everyone that goes there. So we're concerned both for our personal faith, but also for the welfare of our fellow citizens in our country.

Yeah. Well, what kind of encounters have you had in the past with people doing this? We've had a host of different encounters. Sometimes people will respond well to us. They'll hear the message. We'll have a great conversation. Oftentimes, we do get rejected from people. On one specific occasion, some of my fellow students actually,

it's a long story, but they actually stopped the woman from committing suicide while we were in the city. So we run into a host of different experiences in the city. So it's always something different. Wow, that's remarkable. So you mentioned the city ordinance. It was recently passed, correct? So one key piece of information here is we were informed of the solicitation ordinance when we arrived in December of last year, 2018. We began corresponding with a law firm, trying to figure out what our options were. On one occasion, on April 5th, Jeremy Chong went to the park and was actually informed by a park supervisor that they had passed a new set of rules, which cut up the park into 12 different rooms and specifically worded the passing out of literature and making of speeches

was only allowed in one corner for the park. So that specifically is the set of rules we're objecting to now. Our law firm, as well as us, believes it's unconstitutional to divide a public park up into rooms where free speech is only allowed in parts of it. You know, this is, this ordinance then would apply to anyone who wants to speak publicly, right? Not just Christian. So have you gotten any support from beyond the Christian community, like on free speech crowns? Yes, we have. I'm not, I don't believe they've gone in with a lawsuit with us.

But when this was first beginning, the American Civil Liberties Union voiced their support with us in this cause, because apparently they've had issues in Millennium Park. well where they believe that civil liberties of Americans are being violated by the city of Chicago. So this is a very important point. If any political activists wanted to do something in the park or environmental activists, even if a Black Lives Matter group wanted to be in the park, under the city rules, they'd be prohibited from doing so. Wow. So what about your Wheaton College campus community? Have you gotten support there? And are they, is the school weighing in at all? So the institution of the school itself is being careful to make sure that they are not officially associated with the lawsuit.

It is a group of us for independent students who are filing the suit. However, we've received a tremendous amount of informal support in the school. We had an article published in the Wheaton record, which is the local school newspaper about us. The Tribune article that was written about us was passed all over the faculty community and among students. So it's actually come at a particularly crucial time, I think. There's a little bit of division around campus about some race issues. And I think we've been able to find some unity among all that we can all agree the spread of the gospel and the protection of free speech are important issues.

And so we've received a very positive response from our campus community, which has been a blessing. Well, you announced last week that this is going forward. And since then, is the city of Chicago standing firmly behind its new policy? I mean, I know courts in the past have been really deferential to people who are making free speech claims. Have you sensed that they're concerned that they might lose or that they might backtrack? Yes, I do believe so. I believe it was August 26. I could have that date wrong.

But just before we were heading to go file this suit, I'm not sure if it was pressure from journalists or something, but they actually amended the rules slightly where they changed some of the language. within the rules itself where it had said that a permit would be required for anyone disrupting conduct, they changed to say objectively requiring, they actually remove the permit restriction, although it's still

restricted within the park and it's chopped into these rooms. So there's already some concessions being made in a law team's sense that this is the city acknowledging that they know there's an issue with the rules. They haven't made any official public comments yet, but I expect

that there's concern within the city. about the unconstitutionality of the rules. Interesting. So what's next for the case? I mean, what are the next steps? So our complaint was officially filed in a federal court this past Wednesday. We expected to be going to trial this week. Our law firm, Mack and Baker, will be providing any updates on the status of that case.

So we're hoping for it to speedily go through court. The law seems to be entirely on our side. so hopefully it should certainly be coming out in the news at any updates in the case. Well, suing a local city, especially a massive city like Chicago, is it's got to be a big undertaking. Is this something that you would encourage other Americans to do if they feel similarly violated? Absolutely. So all of this was made possible by the tremendous work of Mack and Baker, which is a Christian law firm. They have a podcast called Lawyers for Jesus.

us and this is part of the work they explicitly do to try and protect the religious liberties of those who come to them. So all their work has been pro bono. And I imagine there's many other organizations like Mack and Baker out there who have a desire to see the rights of the individuals in our country protected. And all it took for us was just an inquiry and some desire into the case. So absolutely, I encourage any other American who's undergoing the same type of issues to reach out and try and make some contact because our, our rights being upheld and provided for requires that we constantly fight for them. So I believe it's very important to constantly defend those.

Well, we'll leave it there. Matthew, appreciate your time today, and thanks for joining us. Yeah, you're very welcome, Daniel. Thanks for the opportunity. Do conversations about the Supreme Court leave you scratching your head? If you want to understand what's happening at the court, subscribe to SCOTUS 101, a Heritage Foundation podcast, breaking down the cases, personality. and gossip at the Supreme Court. So, the Labor Party is taking an extreme policy position in Britain. Apparently, most members are in favor of severely curtailing private education. The Washington Post reports that at a conference of Labor Party members almost all backed,

quote, the British government should end tax privileges for private schools, force universities to limit their acceptance of private school students, and allow private schools. assets to be redistributed democratically and fairly. And Reuters reported, quote, about 7% of British pupils are educated at private schools, but critics say they dominate places at top universities and are far overly represented in senior roles in politics, law, media, and business. So, Daniel, what do you think? So I feel like Britain is kind of the last place I would expect to ever get rid of this kind of class different. I mean, in the UK, we think of,

you know, the UK has all these class differences. And we think of these shows like, you know, like the Crown, down Abbey, all these shows that we think of as being like quintessentially British. There's like a very clear class structure. And in America, we typically revolted against that. We think, you know, yeah, we're more, you know, every man for himself kind of thing. And in the UK, that's very rigid. So it's interesting to see this. I just really struggle with, seeing the UK embrace it, especially because they have a House of Lords, which kind of is their upper house of parliament, and they're inherently kind of elite, you know,

and I don't see them going for this. So I don't know. It seems to me like something Labor Party cooked up, and it's just a dream that couldn't actually happen. And also, like, on the merits, I feel like why is it bad to have schools that, like, are putting out really good, You would expect any school that's high performing to put out students that are overrepresented.

Like that's the point. That should be any school's goal would be to put out students that are, you know, dominating in certain areas of society. So like I don't see that as a bad thing. I think there's a question of do students have access to those schools? But why would you penalize the schools if they're like if they're putting out quality students? Yeah. So I think, as you said, Britain seems to have a different class culture, which makes this seem a little bit weird.

I'll also say as someone who follows what Kay Middleton wears, you know, they do first day of school pictures for the kids, for George and Charlotte. And they both go to a private school. So the royal family would be affected, I guess, immediately by this. It would start homeschooling. The most famous homeschoolers. But I mean, from what, like, People magazine says about the Royal Kids School, it's supposed to promote kindness. and they teach ballet and even little George learns ballet. So it seems like all the things liberals would love.

I mean, not that conservatives don't like kindness too. But in regards to the larger thing that concerns me here, and I don't know, I mean, you lived in Britain, so maybe I have a perspective on this. I mean, the United States, I think we very much see, I was homeschooled myself, that like a key way to have your kids stay conservative and stay religious is to homeschool, to do private school,

because we see the left really is taking over public. schools in a way that often is highly problematic that definitely promotes an agenda. I mean, that was the case when I was in public school for a few years and that was, you know, 20, 25 years ago. It's gotten a lot worse. You know, we've talked on this program at the sex ed. We've talked about LGBT history is mandated in some school districts. So I think there's very much, like the left recognizes the power of education.

And I think that, again, I don't know. know if Britain has a population that sends their kids to alternative schools simply for moral or real education. But I do think that you do not want to see, you know, a country like Britain that's so powerful, moving toward a system where there's only one option when it comes to school. Yeah. And this is an example of the state encroaching on a sphere and trying to just eat up everything, you know, in education. think saying that you know you don't have the right to have a space for education outside of the government-controlled school. Right. And like, you know, that's, you hate to see that happening because, like, I don't believe education is something that, you know, the government should own.

Like, you should have a decentralized, you know, education system where you can choose between the parents can choose what kind of school they want to put their kids in. and if that's my biggest concern and kind of beneath the questions about quality and like how well are your kids getting taught, there's also the question of how are they being taught about deeper things about the world and about the way the world is and their views being shaped.

That's a big question. But, you know, I go back to the question of access. Like it seems to me that a lot of the concerns for equality in education could just be met with school choice and vouchers. I mean, don't penalize the schools. You want those schools that are high performing to be rewarded, but allow kids from all different socioeconomic backgrounds access through vouchers. I don't see what the problem with that is.

But what they really want is to control the private schools. Great. I think, I mean, I'm not familiar with education policy in Britain. But I think the fact that they didn't suggest something that embrace school choice is the answer, but suggests it something that would effectively make it harder for the schools to operate and financially succeed. As you said, suggest they want to control education. I did want to circle back to something you said earlier. You mentioned that, well, shouldn't any school want to have its students succeed and didn't their overrepresentation essentially speak well of them? And I think that's an interesting point. And I think it's

something we're grappling with in the United States right now. Every Supreme Court Justice attended an Ivy League, either for a law school or an undergrad, or I believe in some cases, both. That concerns me. Again, I'm not very familiar with the British system, so I can't speak to it. But I do think there is a concern in the broader Western world, I would say, that sometimes it's not merits. It's who you know that's helping people rise. And I think that's concerning. I don't think we necessarily want government intervention, but I think it's something that we should be aware of and maybe talking about as a culture. You know, if the focus always goes on Ivy League kids, there are a lot of people who are really smart who choose to save money and go

to state school. Totally. Or, you know, for whatever reason, decide not to apply to Ivy League. I mean, frankly, when I was, you know, growing up in California, the Ivy League was a lot less important. It's not that they're not aware of it, but there's just not as much focus on it. So I do think it's a real concern. Like where you go to college and where you go to school shouldn't define the rest of your life. You know, where you go to preschool in New York City shouldn't set you on the path that determines everything. But how we solve that I do not know. But you see, some of these Ivy League schools are just coasting on their reputation and their name that they've had for hundreds of years when there's a lot of other law schools out there.

that are putting out graduates that are just as capable. And so I don't think it's a problem with having, it's not a problem of having like an elite group of schools. It's a question of what schools are we putting in that category. And so, you know, we should, you know, be able to have, I totally agree, I think it's a problem that you have justices on the court that are all kind of monolithic in terms of the institutions that shaped them.

And Scalia talked about that when he was, is on the bench. Like, this is a problem. We're too, we don't represent, you know, the, the American public. So I would be very much in favor of having more Supreme Court justices from, you know, other schools that are more mainstream. I mean, ultimately it doesn't matter about where you went to school. It matters, you know, what quality of a judge or whatever your profession is. What, you know, what quality are you? Yeah, but I think, I, I, I think connections. I mean, it's obviously not just the Supreme Court. I believe, you know, look at Wall Street. It's mainly Ivy League types. There's other industries where they're way overrepresented. And I just think it's a question that I'm glad to see as a culture we're grappling with a bit more. And I at least do not dismiss it entirely. Yeah. And you're right. I think that oftentimes it is the social connections that are really what school has become about. If you're at one of these top schools,

I mean, it's about having our kids in those social circles, not even so much them getting a quality education. It's, no, you have to be a part of the social crowd. I mean, we saw this with the college admissions scandal. These parents wanting their kids to be in these schools. And all these kids didn't flunk out, which suggests that even though they were too dumb to get in, the standards weren't rigorous enough that they couldn't stay in. It wasn't about them learning. It was about them getting prestige and being part of this.

social group. So yeah, I mean, that's when that's, at that point of college, you know, the prestige is, is defeating its own purpose. It's supposed to be about, you know, being trained and being, being high quality. Anyway, we'll leave it there for today, but thanks for listening to the Daily Signal podcast brought to you from the Robert H. Bruce Radio Studio at the Heritage Foundation. Please be sure to subscribe on iTunes, Google Play, or SoundCloud, and please leave us a review or a rating, but not a college recommendation. on iTunes to give us any feedback. We'll see you again tomorrow.

The Daily Signal podcast is executive produced by Kate Trinko and Daniel Davis. Sound designed by Lauren Evans and Thalia Ramprasad. For more information, visit DailySignal.com.