It seems tests to the First Amendment never sleep. Michigan’s Asst. Attorney General Andrew Shirvell recently was interviewed on CNN about his blog, “Chris Armstrong Watch.” The blog describes Armstrong, president of the University of Michigan’s student assembly, as a “RADICAL HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVIST, RACIST, ELITIST, & LIAR.” It appears in all-caps on the website as well.
Make no mistake; this blog is offensive and crude. Even if Armstrong wasn’t part of a segment of society that is openly discriminated against, it still would be offensive. That, by itself, would not be enough to take it down. The speech contained within, although caustic, is within the purview of the First Amendment. That being said, some of the activities — such as photographing Armstrong’s apartment and posting screencaps of his Facebook page — border on stalking.
Still, none of this would matter if it were not for Shirvell’s position as assistant attorney general. Here is a person of power and authority actively going after a 21-year-old student at his alma mater. And worse yet, he went about it in the most immature, disrespectful way. Even his boss, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, said in a written statement, “(Shirvell’s) immaturity and lack of judgment outside the office are clear.”
The point of this statement is to say that inside the office of the attorney general, Shirvell is not a bad employee — at least not bad enough to be fired. If this is the case, then his assertions about his right to keep the blog are not that different from students who are fired or denied positions based on Facebook or Twitter posts. If someone is a good employee, does it matter what he or she does outside of work?
The answer, which has been borne out time and again by employers everywhere, is “Yes.” And given Shirvell’s position, it is a definite yes for two reasons. First, Shirvell’s position in the office of attorney general demands a higher standard of excellence. And while his work might be fine, his duty to his office does not end there.
This kind of behavior, though legal, is unbecoming of someone asked to interpret the law objectively. We ask our public officials to be accountable in all areas of their lives, personal and private. And in this case, Shirvell crossed that line repeatedly.
It would be easier to stand on principle and defend the separations of personal and private life, but that would deny the reality of the world in which we live. In this world, public servants do not directly and maliciously attack students. They don’t talk about their thinly-veiled bigotry as if it was the only thing a rational person would do.
It might be true that, as a private citizen, Shirvell was acting within his rights. As a public official, however, he has crossed way over the line. It can’t be said whether Shirvell simply is blind to his responsibilities or simply does not care.
Either way, he should be relieved of them.
Support student media!
Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.
Discussion
Share and discuss “Asst. Attorney General's blog crossed the line ” on social media.
