Tuesday, August 19, 2008

InLine Activism: A University Policy on Free Expression

In recent years, the university where I teach has been, like most non-elite universities, beset by religious extremists "witnessing to" - that is, harassing - secular people, with a particular animus against the campus GLBT organization. After one particularly nasty incident, when the Bible-thumpers invaded a meeting of the GLBT club and destroyed its banner, claiming afterward that their actions were legally protected religious symbolic speech, the Academic Senate decided to draft a University policy on free expression. The matter was referred to the Committee on Student Affairs.

Under similar circumstances some other Cal State campuses adopted grossly illiberal hate-speech policies, so I knew that this was an occasion for me to help draw the lines from an Enlightenment-based, Classical Liberal perspective informed by Objectivism. Committee work usually falls to pre-tenure faculty, and is quite time-consuming, but I volunteered to be vice-chair of the committee for the year. At the start, only I and one other member favored something other than a hate-speech code. By the end of the academic year - and much time spent in discussion and persuasion - the committee sent to the Senate a draft document that (except for boilerplate added by the University lawyer) was close to what I had hoped for.

As usually happens in University politics, the Executive Committee of the Senate did a Cortland on the document I had worked on. So on the second reading I proposed and argued for an amendment that replaced the draft on the floor - that is, the Executive Committee's Cortlandized version - with mine. My amendment passed, and my draft was adopted as an academic policy. Here it is:

Freedom Of Expression

Preamble

Exposure to the widest possible range of ideas, viewpoints, opinions and creative expression is an integral and indispensable part of a university education for life in a diverse global society. California State University, Los Angeles, supports the right of individual students, faculty, staff and student organizations to exercise free speech, including but not limited to artistic, political, and/or symbolic speech, provided only that such expression does not disrupt normal activities or infringe upon the rights of others. This policy establishes reasonable, non-discriminatory, content-neutral guidelines and procedures designed to protect the rights of speakers and non-speakers, respect the rights of faculty and staff in the classrooms, ensure fair access and due process for those who wish to use the university's public forums, and maintain a safe environment on the university campus.

General provisions:

California State University, Los Angeles, supports the right of individual students, faculty, staff and student organizations to exercise all forms of expression and free speech including but not limited to artistic, political, and/or symbolic speech, provided that such activities do not prevent the university from carrying out other aspects of its mission, or infringe upon the rights of others.

Learning to respond to the widest possible range of free expression in a civil and responsible manner is an integral and indispensable part of a university education for life in a diverse global society. The university will not condone behavior that violates, by intimidation or force, the freedom of speech, choice, assembly, or movement of other individuals or organizations, or that restrains others' voluntary exposure to free expression and free speech.

Freedom of expression in the university does not extend to actions that are illegal under the constitutions, or under valid applicable laws, of the United States and of the State of California. This policy does not endorse, or relieve any person from legal liability for actions that amount to libel, slander, or infringement of intellectual property. All persons or groups engaging in activities on university property are subject to, and are expected to comply, with any applicable university policies and procedures.

Unless legally required to do so, CSULA does not support cooperation with individuals, organizations, or agencies that directly or indirectly investigate, surreptitiously monitor, infiltrate organizations or harass persons legitimately exercising their constitutional prerogatives of free speech and assembly.

The mention in this policy of certain means and contexts for freedom of expression shall not be construed to deny or disparage any aspect of freedom of expression by other means or in other contexts.

Whenever any provision of this policy is subject to interpretation, it shall be interpreted to maximize freedom of expression, consistent with the educational mission of the university and with the constitutions and laws of the United States and of the State of California.


Your comments are welcome.

3 comments:

Burgess Laughlin said...

Congratulations on your effort and your achievement. You invested a lot of time and labor, but you have seen some reward for all that investment. Perhaps the investment will continue to pay off in the future. In my experience with various projects, activist or not, the hard part is the first part.

I hope too that the fact that your activism has been in-line--that is, in your own field, academia--has brought an additional measure of satisfaction.

Again, congratulations.

Katie Brakora said...

As a campus club leader, I've been dismayed by our university's fuzziness and slipperiness when it comes to protecting campus clubs' freedom of expression from infringements by other campus clubs or community groups. Here, of course, it's the left that is far more likely to act to suppress the views of those it disagrees with, and the university sits on its hands (the opposite of your school, but the same situation). The events that shut down the UCLA club's debate on immigration last year? The very few, vaguely-worded policies on the subject at my university (Berkeley) pretty much guarantee that that's the outcome supported by the university. Incredible. For better or for worse, at the foreign policy panel we held in the spring, there weren't any scuffles that would attract the attention of the university or legal groups. So the policies persist.

The question I wanted to ask, though, is - did you consider including anything in the freedom of expression policy about right to property? I find that that's the test Berkeley fails 90% of the time - recognizing that freedom of expression entails the right to property and the freedom to use it or dispose of it peacefully, freely, and independently. You may have heard about Berkeley's "tree-sitter saga" which ended recently. The precedent going back to the '60s (at least) means the university won't even protect its right to its own property.

This is why I'm so thrilled to have Eric Daniels coming to speak on free speech. The vast majority of Berkeleyites have no idea what free speech actually is.

Aster of Wellington said...

ZOMG, good news! Thank you! It is utterly wonderful to see something which exists as it actually ought to exist.

So what are you going to do when someone pulls a Heidegger on the American university system?