Censorship should never be an option for universities dealing with student publications of any kind. But student government, in the wake of student outcry, should have the right to distribute funding as it sees fit as a means to represent student interests.

UW-La Crosse’s Student Association recently sparked controversy after forcing the satirical publication The Second Supper to reduce its circulation from 2,000 to 60, but then back up to 900 after the resolution was amended, according to an article in the Badger Herald.

Student leaders cited repeated student concerns as their reason for reprimanding the publication, with the most recent outcry surrounding an article entitled “Cheney Kills Five Crips in Inner-City Hunting Accident” that employed the “n-word,” according to the Badger Herald.

The move to reduce circulation led The Second Supper staff to protest that their right to free speech was under attack, a declaration the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education echoed in a letter.

Student leaders opted to withdraw the resolution as a battle over constitutional rights mounted, leaving the Second Supper to operate as it pleases.

The initial actions by student leaders at La Crosse restricting the publication’s circulation constitute censorship and should never have been viewed as an option. Student publications need to fight against such censorship, especially in the wake of Hosty v. Carter, a court case that established a precedent for universities to censor student publications if they so wish.

Though administrators don’t seem to have been involved ostensibly, one has to wonder if they applied pressure on the La Crosse student government.

The proper way for student leaders to deal with an offensive publication is to pull student funding, but only if student outcry is large enough to suggest a majority of students don’t support funding it. The publication, however, still should be able to operate as it sees fit on its own money.