Thread by @OrinKerr

There's a lot that can be said about the CA6's Meriwether opinion, most of it way outside my expertise. But just one small thought about the para below. If the prof thinks that taking attendance is deeply wrong, wouldn't that make refusal ideological?
opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/2…

Calling roll sends a message, that the school is in charge: A student's presence in class is critical, the school says, whether the student wants to be there or not. Many profs disagree w/this message, though. They think students should be allowed to attend or not as they wish.

If a professor thinks it is critical to learning that the environment be open, and not compelled, the professor may think it important to send the message that attendance is *not* required. They may not want to call roll for an ideological reason.

Granted, there is no broader public debate right now over whether attendance should be required. Professors have strong ideological views about it, but it's not of broad interest outside the classroom. But I don't know if that makes a 1st Amendment difference.

To be clear, I don't have any views on what is ultimately protected or not protected. That's a 1A question outside my expertise. But whatever the answer is, I don't think I'm persuaded by the court's way of distinguishing the roll call hypo. /end