Recently, the Ingham County Circuit Court ruled that Rapp was within his First Amendment rights to confront Ricardo Rego, an MSU undergraduate working as a university parking officer, while at the same time deciding that an MSU ordinance was unconstitutional.

The ruling stemmed from the event last September, when the 26-year-old Rapp, a former MSU undergraduate and then third-year MSU law student, confronted Rego in an on-campus parking ramp. Rapp claimed Rego ticketed his car in the ramp when the meter had not yet expired. As he was leaving the ramp, Rapp drove his car at a high speed toward Rego, came to an abrupt stop and demanded that Rego reveal his name. Rego refused, which eventually led to Rego locking himself in his university parking services truck while Rapp proceeded to take pictures of Rego with his cell phone.

Rapp was charged with violating MSU Ordinance 15.05, which states that “no person shall disrupt the normal activity” of a university employee when they are completing an assigned task.

Although we agree with the decision and affirm the protection of First Amendment rights, this case is unique, and appears to be much more than a simple confrontation. Rapp certainly has a right to tell a parking officer how he feels, but university employees such as Rego deserve to be protected from fear and threats. Seeing as Rego locked himself in his truck before calling police, it seems pretty clear Rapp was not being altogether kind and polite.

It’s clear the language in the ordinance needs to be revised. Lawmakers should reword or clarify exactly what it means to “disrupt (the) normal activity” of a university employee. This could be anything from striking up a conversation to physical confrontation. But the language in the ordinance is so vague, MSU officials should have known it only would be a matter of time before it was challenged.

It’s also important for people to realize that many university employees, such as Rego, are just regular students working their way through school. Just because one of these students works as a parking official does not automatically make them the enemy. Rego was just trying to do his job, and, even if he did mistakenly ticket Rapp, he did not deserve to fear for his safety while doing his job. No one does.

Although we affirm the freedom of speech and the right to protest an official, we don’t affirm acting improperly, which appears to be what Rapp did here. Confrontations about parking, tickets and ordinances likely happen every day, but Rapp’s actions were way over the top. If he was so concerned about being wrongfully ticketed, maybe he should have considered taking a picture of the unexpired meter rather than running down Rego in a potentially assaulting manner.

The First Amendment is one of the most important freedoms we have in American society, and we should protect it at all costs. Rapp might have been within his rights, but that doesn’t justify his actions.

In order for us to truly reap the benefits, we should put an emphasis on using our speech and expression responsibly.