The Wall Street Journal had an editorial this morning called "Defining Free Speech Down on Campus"; I agree that disruptive protests are unprotected by the First Amendment, but I think the editorial erred in its emphasis.
The editorial begins by arguing that no First Amendment rights to protest on privately owned property:
Universities are supposed to be places where students and faculty can debate politics and other subjects without fear or censure. As the anti-Israel protests spread at Columbia, Yale, Harvard, New York University and elsewhere, however, progressives are claiming that any restriction on the protesters is a violation of free speech.
Under its "state action doctrine," the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment applies to government actions toward citizens. It doesn't apply to private citizens or institutions except in rare instances when they are acting as government agents.
