ABSTRACT
In Wisconsin Board of Regents v. Southworth, 520 US 217 (2000), the US Supreme Court refined its First Amendment jurisprudence about governmentally subsidized expression, one of the most nettlesome subsets of the Court's work on the intersection of money and speech. The University of Wisconsin likewise had a generally assessed student activities fee that was used to fund extracurricular groups and activities. A self- described born-again Christian, Southworth specifically objected to the funding of programs on abortion and gay rights and contended that his mandatory contribution to the general student activities fund was tantamount to compelled speech. The case was one in a series of lawsuits filed by conservative groups in the late 1990s in an effort to "defund the left" on college campuses nationwide. In Southworth, by contrast, viewpoint neutrality was preserved by placing all mandatory contributions into a general fund.
