## Facts

- Christopher Todd Brown was a graduate student at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) seeking a master’s degree in materials science.
- UCSB required submission and filing of an approved thesis as a condition for conferral of the degree; the Graduate Student Handbook described the thesis’s purpose as teaching proper presentation of research results and permitted an optional acknowledgments page.
- Brown submitted a thesis for committee review and obtained committee approval of a version that did not include any acknowledgments section.
- After committee approval, Brown added a two-page section titled “Disacknowledgements” containing profane and insulting statements directed at university and public officials.
- When Brown attempted to file the thesis, university staff discovered the added section; the matter was referred to Dean Charles Li and then back to the thesis committee.
- The thesis committee refused to approve the thesis with the added “Disacknowledgements,” and the university refused to accept the thesis for filing unless Brown removed that section.
- Brown pursued internal university appeals without success; UCSB ultimately agreed to confer the degree based on the originally approved thesis version but continued to refuse to file a version containing the “Disacknowledgements.”
- Brown sued university officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that conditioning filing (and initially the degree) on removal of the section violated the First Amendment; the district court granted summary judgment for defendants.

## Issues

1. Whether a public university violates the First Amendment by refusing to accept and file a graduate thesis unless the student removes a profane, insulting “disacknowledgements” section added after faculty approval.
2. Whether a graduate thesis is properly treated as school-sponsored, curricular speech subject to educator editorial control when reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the university officials.
- A majority agreed that UCSB did not violate the First Amendment by refusing to file Brown’s thesis with the “Disacknowledgements” included.
- The lead opinion treated the thesis as school-sponsored, curricular speech and applied the “reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns” standard.
- A concurring judge agreed with the outcome but was less willing to adopt a broad rule applying the same standard across university settings.
- A separate opinion would have found a First Amendment violation as to the thesis but agreed Brown was not entitled to certain other relief.

## Legal Principles

- A public university may impose reasonable academic and professional standards on curricular work that is faculty-supervised and presented as part of the institution’s academic record.
- Where student expression occurs in a school-sponsored, curricular activity that may bear the institution’s imprimatur, the institution may exercise editorial control over style and content if its decision is reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.
- Refusing to include particular content in an official curricular document is more defensible when the student remains free to express the same views through other channels and the restriction is limited to the academic work product.

## Conclusion

The court held that UCSB could require removal of the profane “Disacknowledgements” from Brown’s thesis as a condition of filing because the thesis functioned as school-sponsored curricular speech and the restriction was tied to legitimate educational objectives and professional academic standards.


Brown v. Li, 308 F.3d 939 (9th Cir. 2002)