The Court rejected that claim to interpretive authority: "Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend." Once again, public officials are trying to restrict speech protected by the First Amendment by trying to implement vague standards of meaning. Texas Tech's "advocacy" and "centered on" standards are functionally vague: Professors must guess at what runs afoul of these standards, and rational actors guess conservatively. There's a consistent pattern in each of those states: vague standards, approval requirements, and administrative gates that leave speakers guessing at what will draw scrutiny. The post Texas Tech's Vague Restrictions Show You Don't Have To Ban Speech To Silence It appeared first on Reason.com.