Student Affairs Report_Free Speech_Board of Visitors_February 2019

In Student Affairs, we also seek to understand and empathize with student activists, particularly students of color and sexually-diverse students, who are especially frustrated with argu

Report on Free Speech and Expressive Activity

Submitted by Dr Juliette Landphair, Vice President for Student Affairs

February 2019

Over the last several years, the meaning and value of “free speech” have been contested on hundreds of U.S college campuses Free speech—the individual right guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution to articulate ideas and opinions without fear of government retaliation, censorship, or other sanction—is a celebrated and cherished principle in the United States One famous example is the Free Speech Movement in the mid-1960s, during which student activists on college campuses invoked this right in protest of college administrations’ bans on political activities

In recent years, the principle of free speech has reemerged on campuses in new ways Hate crimes and violent and hateful incidents on campus have increased markedly from 2015 to today Often, the incidents while offensive and even threatening are legally protected by the First Amendment Student activists, however, grow impatient with this legal defense and demand that anyone demonstrating hateful behavior be held accountable by the University Support for

freedom of expression is thus juxtaposed against the values of inclusion A recent example of this tension occurred at the University of Oklahoma, where a student’s Snapchat video captured her in blackface saying a racial slur; at a campus gathering following the incident, many student activists demanded zero tolerance for hate speech as well as the president’s resignation

At the University of Mary Washington, we have held several trainings with staff and dialogues with students to talk about the principles of freedom of expression and inclusion and diversity In principle, most UMW community members agree that open civil discourse and the values of inclusion should be mutually reinforcing; indeed, both are articulated in UMW’s community values, ASPIRE In Student Affairs, we also seek to understand and empathize with student activists, particularly students of color and sexually-diverse students, who are especially

frustrated with arguments about free speech in the face of hateful speech or actions: it makes sense that hateful incidents such as swastika graffiti or a sticker from a white supremacy group would provoke fears among students and other community members about what might come next

This report to the Board of Visitors will describe the current context of the campus free speech debates; it will articulate some of the dilemmas and tensions about free speech and efforts to foster inclusive excellence; and it will explain the ways in which UMW has grappled with our own challenges and has responded with policies, procedures, and practices of our own

POLICIES

As a public university, UMW is a governmental entity and must uphold privileges and

protections afforded by the First Amendment Universities do have the ability, however, to impose limits on the occasion, location, and type of individual expression, known as “time,

place, and manner” restrictions

UMW has two presidential policies that define parameters for free speech and expressive activity

on campus One policy pertains to speakers and groups who are UMW community members; the other pertains to requests from people and groups outside UMW

Members of the University Community: The policy detailing parameters for UMW

community members who wish to gather “for the purposes of publicly communicating a

grievance or publicly stating a position” is called the Expressive Activity by Members of the

University Community The policy’s purpose is the following: “The University of Mary

Washington supports the right of individual students, student organizations, faculty, and staff to dissent and to demonstrate providing such activities do not disrupt normal campus operations, obstruct free access to University buildings, or reasonably infringe upon the right of others.” In the policy, examples of expressive activity are demonstrations, protests, marches, and rallies

As detailed in the policy, UMW community members would do the following with their

requests:

 As stated, “This policy is structured to assure equal opportunity for expressive activity by all members of the University community, to preserve order within the University

community, to protect and preserve University property, and to provide a secure

environment to individual members of the campus community exercising freedoms of expression.”

 The activity must not interfere with the University’s operation

 They are encouraged to inform the UMW Police in advance of the expressive activity in order to promote the safety and security of all individuals

Several additional provisions are detailed in the policy

Non-UMW Community Members: The policy for individuals from outside the UMW

community is called Request to Address Campus Community The policy’s purpose is “to

accommodate the occasional request by individuals from outside the UMW community who seek

to address the campus community, so that persons who are not sponsored by a member of the campus community can be afforded a limited opportunity to speak publicly on campus.”

As detailed in the policy, non-UMW community members must do the following:

 Make their request to speak on campus in advance

 Their activity must not interfere with the University’s primary educational mission

 Their speaking activity must preserve order and protect personal property to ensure a secure environment for all on campus

Several additional provisions are detailed in the policy

PROTOCOLS

Violence Prevention and Threat Assessment UMW has two interdisciplinary teams of faculty and staff trained in threat assessment in higher education that meet monthly to review and

formulate comprehensive violence prevention (Violence Prevention Team) and to review and respond to specific cases that pose a risk to UMW or to individuals at UMW (Threat Assessment

Team)

Crisis Communication Committee The Crisis Communication Committee (CCC) is a standing

interdisciplinary committee appointed by the President that meets monthly and more frequently as-needed to discuss current and pending campus issues that could pose a risk to and/or impact

the University’s reputation

This committee considers and recommends communication messages, taking into account

diverse university perspectives, input from appropriate campus sectors and/or constituents, and support from external experts as warranted In consultation with the President or a presidential designee, such communications are revised and/or disseminated as appropriate The President or designee ensures that the Board of Visitors is notified prior to public release of the message or messages The CCC chair is the Vice President for Advancement and University Relations; the Vice Chair is the Associate Vice President for University Relations

UMW Department of Public Safety If the University becomes aware of a UMW demonstration

or protest in advance, UMW Police representatives meet with event organizers to determine processes regarding time, place, and manner of such activities, including logistical and security needs The Chief of Police keeps the President and key Cabinet members abreast of each stage of planning and implementation

The UMW Department of Public Safety also works closely with campus partners and with law enforcement in other jurisdictions about campus safety concerns With regard to expressive activity, the UMW Police works particularly closely with the Offices of Student Life and Student Involvement, the Violence Prevention and Threat Assessment Teams, and University Relations staff members, who often relay signs of discontent on social media sites to the Chief of Police

Community Partnerships: The UMW Police Department has active mutual aid agreements

(MAA) with the City of Fredericksburg Police Department (FPD), Virginia State Police (VSP), and Virginia Alcohol Beverage Commission (VABC) It has a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF) Chief of Police

regularly attends quarterly Town & Gown meetings held by the University and City to address the concerns of local community residents Additionally, the University Chief of Police along with the FPD Chief of Police jointly participates in the Fair & Impartial Policing citizen’s forum

In addition, the UMW Police has a strong partnership with the Virginia Fusion Center, “a

collaborative effort of state and federal agencies working in conjunction with local partners to share resources, expertise, and/or information to better identify, detect, prevent, and respond

to terrorist and criminal activity utilizing an all crimes/all hazards approach.”

INSTITUTIONAL PRACTICES

In the wake of protests over inflammatory speakers and institutional responses to hateful

expression in speech and writings, college administrators have learned several useful practices to

align their institutions with the free expression policies and values they espouse

Communication: Communicating the values of an institution to the community strengthens

messages of inclusion and diversity at all times, but especially in a crisis UMW has a strong Statement of Community Values and Principles of Diversity and Inclusion, ASPIRE, which we often emphasize in our institutional messaging In addition, leaders are encouraged to

communicate clearly about preparations for a provocative speaker or planned protest and to emphasize, in the event of a crisis over hateful expression, how messages of hate do not align with institutional values

Dialogues Among Members of the Campus Community: While most students, staff, and faculty

could tell you what the First Amendment stands for, they have dissenting ideas of what it

actually protects Studies show that several of today’s U.S traditional-age college students do not know much about the U.S Constitution or have little understanding of how social justice movements in the 1960s and 1970s fought for First Amendment protections In addition, surveys reflect a striking generational divide over free speech: millennials are almost two times more likely than older Americans to believe that hate speech is not covered by the First Amendment Observers of higher education posit several reasons for this divide, including the more diverse demographics of today’s college students, who are not as tolerant of hate speech as older citizens and in fact often demand that college leaders respond to hateful expression by removing it While the United States Supreme Court has shown little inclination to make exceptions for hate speech under the First Amendment, we will watch carefully to see how both courts and campuses

continue to respond to this gap

In Student Affairs, we continue to discuss the values of free speech and inclusion in small and larger staff meetings as well as in dialogues with students Last semester, for instance, in a

student government-sponsored Can We Talk session, students engaged with one another in an

energetic debate over pro-life messages being chalked on campus and whether they were

protected under the First Amendment