Marquette University made a terrible judgment call on Dec. 2, suspending a student from the School of Dentistry for the critical comments he made on his personal Weblog regarding an unnamed professor and unnamed students.

The student has appealed the decision, and the university has until Friday to consider this. We call for the student's immediate reinstatement, until such a time as Marquette can find an appropriate punishment for his actions. Marquette has over-stepped its bounds in this case and is sending a dangerous message to current and prospective students with its decision.

In effect, the university's decision sends the signal that critical comments concerning Marquette will not be tolerated. It has said, on a much broader scale, that the university does not value free speech when the speech is too critical or harsh.

We understand that the dental student's comments were undignified and at times inappropriate. We also understand that attending a private school does not guarantee the First Amendment freedom of speech we possess off campus.

However, as a university looking to be accepted as a premier Jesuit institution, Marquette must know that limiting free speech is in opposition to the beliefs that top tier schools espouse on a daily basis. To take those rights away is not in the best interest of the school or its students.

Students must now fear that anything they say via instant message, Facebook.com or on personal Weblogs are subject to strict scrutiny by the university. Prospective students will remember this fear when deciding which school to attend.

Yet a larger problem remains beyond that of Marquette's image: The decision is tough to defend legally.

The Student-Faculty Review Committee found the student guilty of violating Section IV, Subsection E of the school's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct and Marquette University Standards of Conduct. This condemns actions "which in any way discriminate against or favor group or are harassing in nature."

The expelled student could argue that the university rule in question was not clear enough with regards to off-campus speech. He could also argue that Marquette received money from the government for the dental school building, and in that way is a government actor, broadening the student's right to free speech, according to Erik Ugland, a professor of media law at Marquette. Ugland said in an e-mail interview that he hoped the university would rescind its suspension.

"Continuing with this suspension would set a terrible precedent" regarding online services at Marquette, Ugland wrote.

We fully agree with Ugland and other professors that publicly criticized the university for its decision. This suspension is an egregious error in judgment that must be immediately rectified.

Right now the best thing the university can do is to say its decision to suspend the student was a mistake. To not admit this would be detrimental to the student body as well as the university's national reputation. The best thing for Marquette to do is to come up with a more appropriate punishment and put this blunder behind it.