Hagvarp University FACULTY OF ARS AND SCIENCES FREE SPEECH GUIDELINES As adopted by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences on February 13 and May 15, 190FRUE SPEECH GUIDELINES Free speech is uniquely important to the University because we are a community committed to reason and rational discourse, Free interchange of idea is vital for our primary function of discovering and disseminating ideas through research, teaching, and learning. Curtailment of free spoech undercuts the intellectual freedom that defines our purpose, It also deprives some individuals ofthe right to express unpopular views and others ofthe right to listen to unpopular views Because no other community defines itself so much in terms of knowledge, few others place such a high Priority on freedom of speech. As a community, we take certain rsks by assigning such a high priority to free speech. We assume that the long term benefits to our community will outweigh the short term unpleasant, effects of sometimes noxious views, Because we are & community united by a comtnitment to rational processes, we do not permit censorship of noxious ideas. We are committed to maintaining a climate in which reason and speech provide the correct response toa disagreeable idea Members of the University do not share similar political or philosophical views, nor would such ‘agreement be desitable. They do share, however, a concern for the community defined in terms of free inguiry and dissemination of ideas. Thus they share commitment to policies that allow diverse opinions to flourish and to be heard. In the words of the Resolution on Rights and Responsibilities, the University must protect "the rights ofits members to organize and join politcal associations, convene and conduct public meetings, publicly dlemonstcate and picket in orderly feshion, advocate and publicize opinion by print, sign and voice." ‘There isa broad consensus about the central principles of free speech inthis community. But there is often ambiguity about where the line should be drawn in toms ofthe rights of speakers, protestors, and audience. These guidelines ae intended to supplement and clarify the administration ofthe Faculty of Arts and Sciences’ Resolution o Rights and Responsibilities." [* The Resolution on Rights and Responsibilities is, provided immediately after the Report} Clearer procedures are needed to assist student organizations wishing to sponsor speakers as well as to inform students of the acceptable limits of protest. In addition, this Faculty must be prepared to pay for extra security to protect controversial speakers, to make provisions for reconvening a disrupted speech, and fo ensure that new members of the community are aware of and have an opportunity to discuss ther obligations. Speech is privileged in the University community. We are equally committed to the individual’ pursuit of inquiry and education, There are obligations of civility and respect for others that underlie rational discourse. Racial, sexual, and intense personal harassment not only show grave disrespect forthe dignity of oxhers, but also prevent rational discourse. Behavior evidently intended to dishonor such characteristics as race, gender, ethnic group, religious belief, or sexual orientation is contrary to the pursuit of inquizy and education. Such grave disrespect forthe dignity of others can be punished under existing procedures because it violates a balance of rights on which the University is based. Itis expected that when there i a need to weigh the sight of freedom of ‘expression against other rights, the balance willbe struck after a eareful review of al relevant facts and will be consistent with established First Amendment standards Hard choices regarding appropriate time, place, and manner should have a presumption favoring free speech, For example, concerns about time, place, and manner should ordinarily not be interpreted to prevent signs or expressions of political views that are not disruptive or pose no threat to maintaining public onder at athletic events. While the following guidelines deal primarily withthe problems of disruption of speech, iis important to note that there are other policies (for example, those relating t racial and sexual harassment) relevant tothe administration ofthe Resolution on Rights and Responsibilities. The following guidelines are intended to apply to all gatherings under the auspices ofthe Faculty of ‘Arts and Sciences, but they are not intended to govern classroom procedures. The classroom is a special forum, and the teacher should be the one who determines the agenda of discourse inthe elasroom.GUIDELINES 1. Expression and Dissent ‘A. Within the context described in the preamble, the speaker's right of expression and the audience's right to listen take precedence. Afterall, the event oceurted because the audience came to hear the speaker. ‘The ‘University’s procedures should maximize the room for dissent without curtailing the speaker's ability to communicate, 'B. Our definition of disruption has two components |, The length of time of the action -- in order for an action to be deemted a disruption, it must extend over an unreasonable period of time. Thus, the frst condition for distuption is that the action is repeated or continuous, extending over an unacceptable period of time, 2, The importance of creating an environment in which the audience can hear the speaker — a disruptive action effectively prevents members of the audience from adequately hearing, or seeing the spenker. Ifa person interrupts the speaker every few words, she prevents members of the audience from hearing the speech. ‘The speaker must be allowed to proceed at a reasonable pace, to make coherent progress ia the expression of his or her ideas, ‘Thus, the definition of disruption is any repeated or continuous action which effectively prevents members of the audience from adequately hearing or seeing the event. C. Because the definition of disruption is subject to interpretation, a single warning procedure would avoid confusion about what constitutes disruption. By issuing a warning, the distupters are told that their actions are unaceeptable and must stop. Members of the audience will learn where they stand; they will know where the line is, If people cross that declared line again, they cannot claim not to have realized they were disruptive. D. Atevents in which there are a large number of disrupters, the officers ar moderator should try to approach the most distuptive individuals first. The officer or moderator has three types of warning at his disposal: 1. A warning directed at a specific individual 2. A warning directed ata small, specifically indicated group. 5. A warning tothe entire audience. Because this warning entails interrupting the speech, it shoud be employed only when the other warnings are inappropriate E. A warning is not needed in cases of physical violence. Individuals who commit such acts should be jected from the event immediately. Any act or threat of physical violence must be regarded as a complete lack of respect for the deepest values that unite the commaunity F, The University should back up the warning by removing the disrupter i s/he does not heed the warning. Within the constraints of pradence and safely, ifthe disrupter refuses to leave, officers ofthe University should try to remove him or her. If that proves impossible, they should adjourn the meeting and try fo reconvene it in another room where security forces ean control admission. A disrupter who resists removal ‘and persists in causing disruption should be subject to severe disciplinary measures. G. Audience's Responsibility: The audience, ike the host and the speaker, must respect the right to dissent. A member of the audience or the host organization who substantially interferes with acceptable dissent is violating these guidelines in the same way as a dissenter who violates the rights of the speaker or audience. H. Question and Answer Periods in Open Meetings: In open meetings, the sponsoring organization should make every effort to arrange with the speaker to assure a reasonable opportunity for a question and answer period. 1. Punishments should be decided only on the basis ofthe specific infraction ofthe rules which has been, committed, not on the politcal content ofthe transgression. In cases of obstruction, for example, the offenders should be punished for breaking the law of trespassing or rules against interfering with freedom of movernent, not for the content oftheir political expression. [tis important that punishments not be used to discourage the specific content of legitimate political dissent as defined in these guidelines IL Use of a Moderator ‘A. Determination of Need: Administration officials may determine thatthe protection of free speech at an open meeting requires a Moderator, or a group may request itBB. Selection: The sponsoring organization will select a. member of the Faculty or Administration to be Moderator and will notify the University administration of its selection, which will normally be approved if the Person is broadly perceived in the community to be capable of acting in a neutral and non-partisan manner on the issue, In case of deadlock, students may appeal to the Free Speech Committee described below, and ultimately to the Faculty Couneil. ‘The Moderators task shall be to preserve the University's eoncem for the protection of free speech. In carrying out this role, the Moderator should be aware of the danger of curtail free speech because of audience dissent, ©. Role 1, ‘The Moderator should make clear at the meeting that his/her role reflects no position for or against the views of the speaker or the sponsoring organization. 2, At the event, final decisions regarding balancing the rights of the speaker with the rights of those who disagree will be made by the Moderator, ‘These decisions inelude, but are not limited to: a. Asking a speater to reffain from the use of slurs or epithets, bb, Bjecting a disrupter from the room, c. Suspending a speech temporarily if disruption occurs. d. Moving an event because of disruption or security concerns, . Canceling an event because ofa clear threat of physical violence or to University property. 3. When there is not incitement of violence or University property is not threatened, the ‘Moderator should ordinarily not cancel an event, If a Moderator must adjourn an event, efforts should be made promptly to reconvene i, if possible, in a setting where fice speech can be protected. (It is understood that the police always have emergency powers, and that nothing in these Guidelines questions the University’s legal responsibility for safety on campus. IFit becomes necessary to use such residual powers, a University official should normally attempt first to consult with the Moderator.) 1B TIL. Meetings to be Designated as Open or Closed ‘A. Gatherings on campus may be considered closed under traditions of privacy. A meeting to which @ speaker is invited may be designated "open" or Ylosed.” In ether ease, incidental University facilities such as ‘oom and utilities may be used. B. ‘The press may be excluded when a meeting is closed, The chair or moderator of a meeting may ask the press t0 treat a speaker's remarks as “off the record.” CC. Ifa student organization or group uses University funds for other than incidentals, the meeting must be designated and treated as open. Use of room and utilities is considered "incidental" and therefore available for a closed meeting; all expenses of substance e-, a speaker's travel expenses or provision of more than de minimis tefreshiments) ate not considered "incidental," and may only be paid from University funds ifthe ‘meeting is open. D. In considering closure of a meeting against the wishes of the sponsoring organization, University officals or moderators should try to keep the speech open if adequate security resources are available. E, Closed Meetings 1. A closed meeting may be limited to membership in the organization, or by invitation to designated persons or groups, but cannot be closed on the basis of any category which is discrimination in violation ofthe University’s published antiiscrimination polices. 2, To the extent that a closed meeting is advertised to those who are not invited to attend, there must be clear disclosure thatthe meeting is closed. F, Open Meetings 1. A meeting is considered open even though the sponsoring organization limits the audience t0 members of the University community, or fo portions thereof, unrefated to the sponsoring organizationIV, Identification ‘A. Attendees may be required to produce identification, so long as: 1. Advance notice is given as to what specific types of ID will be required, 2, Identification procedures are enforeed consistently and unifoerly BB, When required in an open meeting, identifieation and, when appropriate, press credentials should be checked by an official petecived to be neutral e-, an administrator ora designated general student monitor), sot by a member ofthe sponsoring organization or by any person perceived as partisan V. Security A, University officials shall determin, either on their own or after hearing from student organizations or groups, whether the protection of fee speech at an open meating requires security measures 'B, Upon making this determination that security measures are equited, University officials, in consultation with the University Potice, will have andl will exercise the responsibility to determine the nature and extent of such measures. ‘The University will fund these measures, They may include but are wot limited to 1. Bags and other containers may be subject to search by University Police, and may be required to be putin a checkroom before entrance to the event. 2. Coats of outerwear may be required to be put in a checkroom before entrance, 3. Videotaping of the event may be done, with notice to the audience, C. For closed meetings, the sponsoring organization wil ordinarily be responsible for planning, obtaining, and funding its own security D, Provision for security measures should be planned with the University Police. Only the police may use force as a security measure, ‘VI. Sanctions: Violation of the free speech rights of any person, as protected in these guidelines, will be treated seriously. Sanctions may include: 1. Expulsion from the meeting or event. 2. Arrest or other legal action, 3. Disciplinary proceedings before the Judicial Board, which may lead to: a. Waring b, Written reprimane. ©. Probation 4, Required to withdraw «. Pursuant o existing procedures, these sanctions may be noted on the student's record. 4. While the disciplinary bodies are charged with determining appropriate penalties, itis our ‘recommendation that the appropriate boards discuss the range of penalties and make them widely known in che University Community, (Some illustrative recommendations are in Appendix A.) Vil. Advisory Committee on Free Speech: Some form of student-facully advisory committee on free speech should be established by the Faculty Council. [t should involve both undergraduate and graduate students. Its tasks would be fo discuss ambiguities which may arise in applying these Guidelines in the future and t0 introduce these values to new generations of the University Community. This could include meetings with administrators and others to discuss the difficulty of striking appropriate balances of rights in hard cases. Protection of fiee speech in our community requires not only guidelines but a process for continuing a moral discourse that is vital to our existence, Joseph Nye, Chairman Henry Ehrenreich Michael Sande!APPENDIX A PENALTY RECOMMENDATIONS Case. Suggested Range 1. Warned, asked to leave, leaves voluntarily without disruption No punishment to admonishment Il. Wamed, asked to leave, leaves voluntarily though disruptively Admonishment to semester probation TIL, Wamed, asked to leave, refuses fo leave, or must be escorted by police Admonishment or semester probation to one year probation, IV. Warned, asked to leave, refuses to leave, and effectively prevents free speech Depending upon severity of disruption, one year probation 10 one year withdrawal V. Itnmediately ejected due to physical attack Atleast one year withdrawal to no upper limit. ‘These recommended punishments are prototypical examples. They should not be interpreted as preventing lesser penalties in exonerating circumstances or greater penalties in aggravating circumstances. The University also has the option of pressing criminal charges. These categories suggest higher ranges of punishment for effective disruption of free speech or violence. The difference between categories II and II relates to refusing to obey the moderator who has the right to determine that protest has crossed the line defined io this report, The difference between categories III and IV relates to the effective prevention of free speech. The difference between categories IV and V relates to the use of violence. RESOLUTION ON RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ‘The central functions of an academic community ate learning, teaching, research and scholarship. By accepting membership in the University, an individual joins a community ideally characterized by free expression, free inquiry, intellectual honesty, respect for the dignity of others, and openness to constructive change. ‘The rights and responsibilities exercised within the community must be compatible with these qualities, ‘The rights of members of the University are not fundamentally different from those of other members of society. ‘The University, however, has a special autonomy and reasoned dissent plays a particularly vital part in its existence. All members of the University have the right to press for action on matters of concern by any appropriate means. The University must affirm, assure and protect the rights ofits members to organize aod join political associations, convene and conduct public meetings, publiely demonstrate and picket in an orderly fashion, advocate and publicize opinion by print, sign and voice. ‘The University places special emphasis, ag well, upon certain values which are essential to its nature as «an acadentic community. Among these are freedom of speech and academic freedom, freedom from personal force and violence, and freedom of movement. Interference with any of these freedoms must be regarded as a serious violation of the personal rights upon which the community is based. Furthermore, although the administrative processes and activities of the University cannot be ends in themselves, such functions are vital 19 the orderly pursuit of the work of all members of the University. Therefore, interference with members of the University in performance of their normal duties and activities must be regarded as unacceptable obstruction of the essential processes of the University. Theft or willful destruction of the property of the University or its meanbers must also be considered an unacceptable violation of the rights of individuals or of the community as @ whole.Moreover, i isthe esponsibility of all members of the academic community to maintain an mosphere it which violations of rights are unlikely to occur and ta develop processes by which these rights are fully assured. In particular, iis the responsibilty of officers of administration and instruction ta be alert to the needs ‘of the University community; to give full and fair hearing to reasoned expressions of grievances; and to respond prompily and in good faith fo such expressions and to widely-expressed needs for change. In making decisions ‘Whiel concern the community as a whole or any part of the community, officers are expected to consult those affected by the decisions. Failures fo meet these responsibilities may be profoundly damaging to the life of the University. ‘Therefore, the University community has th right to establish orderly procedures consistent with the imperatives of academic freedom to assess the policies and assure the responsibility of those whose decisions affect the life of the University No violation of the rights of members of the University, nor any failure to meet responsibilities, should be interpreted as justifying any violation of the rights of members of the University. All members of the community - students and officers alike ~ should uphold the rights and responsibilities expressed inthis, Resolution if the University isto be characterized by mutual respect and trust Interpretation: ‘The Faculty regards it as implicit in the language of the Resolution on Rights and Responsibilities that intense personal harassment of such a character as to amount to grave disrespect for the dignity of others be regarded as an unacceptable violation of the personal rights on which the University is based,