thefire.org

Westfield State College

Speech Code of the Month: Westfield State College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for February 2010: Westfield State College in Massachusetts. Westfield's Student Handbook prohibits "discrimination," which it defines to include "making disparaging remarks that insult or stigmatize a student's cultural background or race" as well as "making insensitive remarks that reflect a student's disability." Westfield State College is a public university, bound to protect its students' First Amendment right to free speech. Unfortunately, this policy prohibits large amounts of protected speech and could easily be applied to punish the kind of controversial expression about important political and social issues that is at the very heart of what the First Amendment exists to protect.
Read Full Article

University of Northern Colorado

Speech Code of the Month for January 2010: the University of Northern Colorado

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for January 2010: the University of Northern Colorado. The University of Northern Colorado's (UNCO's) Residence Handbook prohibits "Bias Motivated Incidents," including telling "inappropriate jokes" or "intentionally, recklessly or negligently causing physical, emotional, or mental harm to any person." (Emphasis added.) It is impossible to know what might cause another person "emotional" or "mental" harm, and the policy does not even require that the speaker intend to cause such harm. This vague and overbroad policy—part of a "bias reporting" trend that FIRE has discussed on numerous occasions—leaves students vulnerable to punishment for telling jokes as well as for a broad, undefined range of other speech that some on campus might find offensive. At a public university like UNCO, or at any university that claims to value the rights of free speech and expression, this is totally unacceptable.
Read Full Article

State University of New York - Brockport

Speech Code of the Month: SUNY Brockport

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for December 2009: SUNY Brockport. SUNY Brockport's "Internet/Email Rules and Regulations" state that "All uses of Internet/e-mail that harass, annoy or otherwise inconvenience others are not acceptable. This includes, but is not limited to ... offensive language or graphics (whether or not the receiver objects, since others may come in contact with it)." (Emphasis added.) This policy is both unconstitutionally vague and unconstitutionally overbroad. What makes it all the more remarkable is that SUNY Brockport has already been sued once over its unconstitutional speech codes; it is absurd that an institution that has already once had to abandon its speech codes because of a time-consuming and expensive First Amendment lawsuit would once again risk liability by maintaining a ridiculous policy such as this one.
Read Full Article

Keene State College

Speech Code of the Month: Keene State College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for November 2009: Keene State College in New Hampshire. Keene State's "Statement on Sexist Language" states that the college "will not tolerate language that is sexist and promotes negative stereotypes and demeans members of our community." Yet there are many serious and legitimate expressions of opinion that some would say are sexist and promote negative stereotypes; for instance, recall former Harvard University President Larry Summers' speech suggesting that differences in aptitude might be a factor in women's underrepresentation at the highest levels of math and science. The expression of different and controversial views is an essential element of a university education. Keene State's policy, which chills debate by threatening to punish any expression that might be deemed "sexist," is not only unconstitutional but also runs contrary to what a university should be.
Read Full Article

James Madison University

Speech Code of the Month: James Madison University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for October 2009: James Madison University. JMU's policy on "Obscene Conduct" provides that "[n]o student shall engage in lewd, indecent or obscene conduct or expression, regardless of proximity to campus." Because "lewd" and "indecent" have no defined legal meaning, they could be interpreted to include almost any crude or vulgar language that someone found offensive, most of which would nonetheless be constitutionally protected. Worse yet, the policy allows for punishment of lewd and indecent expression on or off campus, so virtually everything that students say or write is fair game. When questioned, the JMU administration stated that the only purpose of the policy is to punish already illegal conduct such as public urination and masturbation. To do this, however, the policy only needs to address conduct, not expression. Despite numerous statements of concern from FIRE and JMU students, the university has not changed the language of the policy to apply only to conduct, and has instead resorted to verbal chicanery to argue that the phrase "conduct or expression" does not really mean what it says. This development should be of great concern to anyone who cares about student rights.
Read Full Article

University of Idaho

Speech Code of the Month: University of Idaho

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for September 2009: the University of Idaho. In the University of Idaho's residence halls, "Actions and/or communication that are discriminatory, harassing or insensitive are not permitted." (Emphasis added.) This policy prohibits a staggering amount of constitutionally protected speech. Moreover, it infantilizes college students by assuming they cannot cope with any sort of offense. Speech codes have been successfully challenged elsewhere in the Ninth Circuit (at San Francisco State University and the Los Angeles Community College District), so the university is maintaining this policy at its peril.
Read Full Article

Northern Illinois University

Speech Code of the Month: Northern Illinois University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for August 2009: Northern Illinois University (NIU). In the NIU Student Code of Conduct, "harassment" is defined as the "Intentional and wrongful use of words, gestures and actions to annoy, alarm, abuse, embarrass, coerce, intimidate or threaten another person." (Emphasis added.) NIU is a public university, which means it is legally obligated to protect its students' First Amendment rights, and this policy fails miserably. While the university may legitimately prevent students from threatening and intimidating one another, it most certainly cannot prohibit students from annoying and embarrassing one another, even intentionally. In fact, satire and parody-which are entitled to particularly strong constitutional protection-are frequently profoundly embarrassing and annoying to their targets. This policy is representative of the prevailing culture on so many college campuses nowadays, in which there is a presumed "right not to be offended"-a "right" that undermines the whole notion of a university as a "marketplace of ideas" where students learn by exposure to a variety of different opinions expressed in a variety of different ways-including opinions and forms of expression that may be offensive.    
Read Full Article

Rhode Island College

July 2009: Rhode Island College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for July 2009: Rhode Island College. Rhode Island College, a public college, maintains a Code of Social Responsibility for its residence halls that provides that "[T]he Office of Residential Life & Housing will strongly support the Rhode Island College Sexual/Racial Harassment policies, and will not tolerate actions or attitudes that threaten the welfare of any of its members." (Emphasis added.) The policy also contains a list of "proscribed behaviors," including "racially biased comments or racist humor." By prohibiting not only actions but also attitudes, this policy directly infringes on students' right to freedom of conscience—that is, their right to hold their own thoughts and beliefs free from governmental intrusion. The policy also explicitly threatens core political expression, since many would consider certain opinions about important issues like affirmative action and illegal immigration to be "racially biased," or political cartoons on these subjects to be "racist humor."
Read Full Article

New York University

June 2009: New York University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for June 2009: New York University. NYU’s Anti-Harassment Policy explicitly prohibits “insulting,” “teasing,” and even “inappropriate jokes” when they are based on a legally protected status such as race, gender, or religion. This prohibition of protected speech is a clear violation of NYU’s policy stating that “Free inquiry, free expression, and free association are indispensable to the purposes of the University, and must be protected as a matter of academic freedom within the University….” How is free expression possible when students face punishment for any speech perceived by another as insulting, degrading, or even merely inappropriate? There are many important conversations to be had on matters such as race, religion and gender that will likely—in a truly open debate—lead to feelings of insult or hurt. By subjecting students engaging in this type of unfettered free expression to punishment, NYU is simply shutting down whole avenues of discussion.
Read Full Article

Middlebury College

May 2009: Middlebury College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for May 2009: Middlebury College in Vermont. Middlebury's ironically named policy on Freedom of Inquiry and Expression provides that "[s]tudent organizations bear full responsibility for arranging and financing any Department of Public Safety provisions that may be necessary in connection with controversial speakers." The problem with this policy is twofold. First, it gives the administration great discretion to burden speech with which it disagrees. Secondly, it also allows fellow students to exercise a "heckler's veto" over unpopular speech by threatening disruptive protests, thus requiring additional security and, accordingly, additional-and possibly prohibitive-costs. At a public university, this policy would be unconstitutional; the U.S. Supreme Court has explicitly held that it violates the First Amendment to charge varying fees for events based on how much police protection the event would need. Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123 (1992). Although Middlebury is private, its policies protect the right to free speech, even stating that "free speech must be protected even when the views expressed are unpopular or controversial."  In light of these promises, it is hypocritical and reprehensible for the college to financially burden controversial speech on campus.
Read Full Article

San Jose State University

Speech Code of the Month: San Jose State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for April 2009: San Jose State University (SJSU). SJSU's housing department maintains a policy on "harassment and/or assault" which prohibits, among other things, "publicly telling offensive jokes," and which provides—in direct violation of the law—that "the conduct is evaluated from the complainant's perspective." SJSU is a public university, bound by the First Amendment. What's more, it is a part of the California State University system, several of whose speech codes have already been the subject of a successful federal lawsuit. Thus, the fact that SJSU maintains this egregious harassment policy is simply indefensible.
Read Full Article

University of Tulsa

March 2009: University of Tulsa

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for March 2009: the University of Tulsa. While the University of Tulsa is a private institution, it promises its students all of the same free speech rights they would have at a public university, so it must not prohibit speech protected by the First Amendment. Nevertheless, it does just that. The University of Tulsa's harassment policy is vague, overbroad, and terribly confusing. It contains conflicting definitions of harassment as well as a list of examples of harassment that include protected speech. The policy, which is a mess of contradictory definitions and ambiguous wording, leaves students vulnerable to punishment not only for protected expression but also for core political speech, which is at the heart of what the First Amendment protects.
Read Full Article

Southern Illinois University at Carbondale

February 2009: Southern Illinois University at Carbondale

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for February 2009: Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). FIRE, along with the heads of the Illinois Association of Scholars and the ACLU of Southern Illinois, recently wrote to SIUC Chancellor Sam Goldman regarding the university's free speech zone policy. In response Chancellor Goldman lashed out, erroneously alleging that FIRE had given SIUC its "red light" rating because of its proposed sexual harassment policy rather than for its many existing policies that violate the First Amendment. One of those policies, the Policy on Non-Discrimination and Non-Harassment, prohibits (among other things) all "objectionable epithets" and "demeaning depictions." This policy explicitly prohibits constitutionally protected speech, since most "demeaning depictions," such as parodies and satires, are protected by the First Amendment.
Read Full Article

State University Of New York - University at Buffalo

January 2009: University at Buffalo

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for January 2009: University at Buffalo (also known as SUNY Buffalo). The university's Guide to Residence Hall Living contains a Statement of Civility that requires students in the residence halls "to be courteous and polite or, simply put, to be mannerly." The policy provides that "[a]cts of incivility—will not be tolerated by the Residential Life community." This policy impermissibly restricts students' right to freely express themselves in the residence halls, which are the closest thing students have to their own homes while attending college. Learning to live with and engage other people outside of one's own family is often a vital part of the college experience, and college dormitories should be a place where lively debate occurs as students challenge one another's pre-existing ideas and conceptions. UB's policy, with its Victorian-era requirement of "mannerly" conduct and expression at all times, instead requires students to walk on eggshells around one another to avoid being guilty of "incivility." A university may certainly require that student conduct in the residence halls not interfere with other residents' ability to sleep or study. But to require that all interaction be "courteous," "polite," and "mannerly" is to stifle debate in one of the places that students interact most freely and naturally—the place where they live.
Read Full Article

Lone Star College-Tomball

Speech Code of the Month: Lone Star College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for December 2008: Lone Star College in Texas. FIRE recently addressed the suppression of free speech at one of the colleges in the Lone Star College System, when Lone Star College–Tomball censored a student group for distributing a jocular flyer listing "Top Ten Gun Safety Tips." Now, FIRE has learned that the Lone Star College System maintains speech codes that threaten free expression at all five of the system's campuses. The most vague and overbroad of these policies, found in the system-wide Student Code of Conduct, prohibits any "vulgar expression" on any Lone Star College campus, including in electronic communications. This policy is unconstitutionally vague; students have no way of knowing what exactly is prohibited, since what is "vulgar" depends entirely on who is hearing or viewing the expression in question. It is also overbroad, explicitly prohibiting speech and expression such as the kinds of "vulgar" satire, parody, and social commentary that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held are protected by the First Amendment.
Read Full Article

Speech Code of the Month: University of the Pacific

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for November 2008: University of the Pacific. The university's policy on Harassment, Coercion, and Discrimination prohibits any conduct "that undermines the emotional, physical, or ethical integrity of any community member." This includes any expression, "intentional or unintentional," that "has the effect of demeaning, ridiculing, defaming, stigmatizing, intimidating, slandering or impeding the work or movement of a person or persons or conduct that supports or parodies the oppression of others." Examples of explicitly prohibited expression include "insults," "jokes," "teasing," and "derogatory comments." The policy is so fraught with attacks on free speech that it is difficult to understand how anyone even remotely aware of the First Amendment allowed it to be implemented. (The University of the Pacific, as a private, secular university in California, is bound by the Leonard Law, which prohibits private institutions from maintaining regulations that at their public counterparts would violate the First Amendment.) In fact, this policy, which openly threatens core political speech, explicitly bans protected speech, and leaves students at the mercy of the most sensitive members of their community, is one of the worst speech codes FIRE has ever seen.
Read Full Article

University of Northern Iowa

Speech Code of the Month: University of Northern Iowa

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for October 2008: the University of Northern Iowa. Overbroad "bias incident" policies are a problem on college campuses nationwide. But perhaps the problem is nowhere so great as at the University of Northern Iowa, a public university, which defines a "bias incident" as "any inappropriate word or action directed toward an individual or group based upon actual or perceived identity characteristics or background of a group or person and that is contrary to law or policy." This policy is fatally flawed in many ways, most importantly in that the prohibition on "inappropriate words" is both unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. Students will have to guess at what will be deemed "inappropriate," and most speech that a reasonable person would find "inappropriate" is still wholly protected by the First Amendment. FIRE calls on the University of Northern Iowa to immediately revise this shameful policy.
Read Full Article

Pennsylvania State University - University Park

Speech Code of the Month: Pennsylvania State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for September 2008: Pennsylvania State University. Penn State's "Penn State Principles" require students to agree that "I will not engage in any behaviors that compromise or demean the dignity of individuals or groups, including intimidation, stalking, harassment, discrimination, taunting, ridiculing, insulting, or acts of violence." By maintaining this policy, Penn State—as a public university in the Third Circuit—is flouting two binding court decisions clearly holding that policies such as this one are unconstitutional on college campuses and even in public high schools.
Read Full Article

Jackson State University

Speech Code of the Month: Jackson State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for August 2008: Jackson State University in Mississippi. Jackson State's harassment policy provides, in relevant part, that "The scope of any form of harassment includes language to physical acts which degrades, insult, taunt, or challenges another person by any means of communication, verbal, so as to provoke a violent response, communication of threat, defamation of character, use of profanity, verbal assaults, derogatory comments or remarks, sexist remarks, racists remarks or any behavior that places another member of the University community in a state of fear or anxiety." This policy is so extraordinarily jumbled that it is impossible to tell exactly what is prohibited—a sure prescription for an unlawful chilling effect on campus speech. Moreover, although the full scope of the policy is impossible to discern, it is clear that much of what is prohibited is constitutionally protected expression. Jackson State's student handbook promises that "[a]s U.S. citizens, students enjoy the same freedom of speech, peaceful assembly, and right of petition that other citizens enjoy." But under the university's current regulations, nothing could be farther from the truth.
Read Full Article

Delta State University

Speech Code of the Month: Delta State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for July 2008: Delta State University. Delta State's harassment policy provides that harassment occurs when the work or learning environment "is one that a reasonable person would objectively find hostile or abusive or one that the particular person who is the object of the harassment perceives to be hostile or abusive." (Emphasis added.) Defining harassment on the basis of the perception of the allegedly harassed individual completely eliminates any semblance of objectivity in Delta State's harassment policy. In other words, harassment occurs when either a reasonable or an unreasonable person finds the environment to be hostile. This means that students at Delta State are at the mercy of the most sensitive members of the community—if they feel harassed, they have been harassed, no matter how unreasonable those feelings may be. Delta State's policy stands in stark contrast to applicable First Amendment law, which Delta State—as a public institution—is bound to uphold. Moreover, it is a moral outrage. Under this speech code, students at Delta State must tailor their expression to avoid offending those with the most tender sensibilities, a requirement that undoubtedly has a powerful chilling effect on expression at the university. Delta State's harassment policy undermines the entire purpose of a university, turning it into a place where people walk on eggshells rather than the marketplace of ideas it is supposed to be.
Read Full Article

Tufts University

Speech Code of the Month: Tufts University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for June 2008: Tufts University. Tufts already has the dubious distinction of a spot on FIRE's Red Alert List, which is reserved for colleges and universities that display the utmost disregard for their students' individual rights. Tufts earned its Red Alert status after finding last spring that The Primary Source (TPS), a conservative student newspaper, violated the school's harassment policy by publishing two satirical articles mocking affirmative action and Islamic fundamentalism. It is that vague and overbroad harassment policy that has now earned Tufts the ignominy of being named Speech Code of the Month for June 2008.
Read Full Article

University of Louisville

Speech Code of the Month: University of Louisville

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for May 2008: the University of Louisville. The University of Louisville's Code of Student Conduct prohibits "[e]ngaging in intentional conduct directed at a specific person(s) which seriously alarms or intimidates such person(s) and which serves no legitimate purpose," but this hopelessly vague and overbroad restriction on speech has no place at a public university. Louisville also defines "hostile environment harassment" as "unwelcome comments or conduct that have the purpose of... creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working or learning environment that a reasonable person would find threatening or intimidating." However, this definition fails to meet the exacting standards for peer-on-peer harassment supplied by the Supreme Court, resulting in an impermissibly vague restriction on expression that serves to chill speech on campus.   
Read Full Article

Murray State University

Speech Code of the Month: Murray State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for April 2008: Murray State University in Kentucky. The Women's Center at Murray State maintains a guide to sexual harassment that provides students with numerous examples of sexual harassment, including, among others, "telling sexual jokes or stories"; "looking a person up and down (elevator eyes)"; and "displaying sexual and/or derogatory comments about men/women on coffee mugs...." Unless these behaviors rise to the level of severity and pervasiveness necessary to constitute actual harassment, however, they are constitutionally protected expression, which Murray State—as a public university—is obligated to protect.
Read Full Article

Valdosta State University

Speech Code of the Month: Valdosta State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for March 2008: Valdosta State University. Valdosta State, a public university with over 11,000 students, maintains just one small "Free Expression Area" on its large campus. To make matters worse, the Free Expression Area is only available between the hours of "noon and 1 pm and/or 5 and 6 pm"—just two hours a day—and must be reserved 48 hours in advance, without exception. This free speech zone policy—easily the worst FIRE has ever seen—is just one more example of Valdosta State's disregard for the First Amendment: the university already has a spot on FIRE's Red Alert list for its shameful treatment of student Hayden Barnes, who was expelled for peacefully protesting the construction of new parking garages on campus.
Read Full Article

University of Utah

Speech Code of the Month: University of Utah

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for February 2008: the University of Utah. This public university's Department of Housing & Residential Education prohibits the posting of "any information that is deemed to be racist, sexist, indecent, scandalous, illegal, inciting, advertise alcohol or illegal substances, or in any way oppressive in nature." The prohibition on posting any "scandalous" information hearkens back to the Victorian era; it also prohibits broad swaths of constitutionally protected speech, as do the restrictions on "racist," "sexist," or "oppressive" postings. Moreover, the policy gives residence life administrators seemingly unfettered discretion to define all of those vague and general terms. As a public university, the University of Utah is bound to uphold its students' First Amendment rights, and this policy utterly fails to do so.
Read Full Article

Texas Southern University

Speech Code of the Month: Texas Southern University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for January 2008: Texas Southern University. Texas Southern's Student Code of Conduct prohibits "intentional mental or physical harm," which it defines as "Knowingly or recklessly causing or attempting to cause by acts and/or threats, emotional, mental, physical or verbal harm to another person ...This includes intimidation, emotional force, embarrassing, degrading or damaging information, assumptions, implications, remarks, or fear for one's safety." The policy's exceedingly vague proscriptions make it difficult—if not impossible—for students to know what is actually prohibited, leaving the university with unfettered discretion to punish students for constitutionally protected speech. At a public university like Texas Southern, this policy is both wholly unconstitutional and morally reprehensible.
Read Full Article

McNeese State University

Speech Codes of the Year: 2007

As Torch readers know, each month FIRE singles out a particularly egregious speech code for our Speech Code of the Month award. While all twelve Speech Codes of the Month for 2007 were both tragic and laughable, I would like to highlight a few that deserve special mention as our Speech Codes of the Year: Northeastern University in Boston. Northeastern’s Appropriate Use of Computer and Network Resources Policy provides that no student may use Northeastern’s information systems or facilities to “[t]ransmit or make accessible material, which in the sole judgment of the University is offensive….” McNeese State University in Louisiana. McNeese State maintains what is possibly the most restrictive free speech zone policy FIRE has ever seen, with the possible exception of Texas Tech’s infamous free speech gazebo: The “Public Forum Regulations” provide that students may exercise their right to speak and demonstrate—a right guaranteed to students of this public institution by the First Amendment—in just two “zones.”
Read Full Article

University of Cincinnati

Speech Code of the Month: University of Cincinnati

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for December 2007: the University of Cincinnati. The University of Cincinnati maintains a “Free Speech Area” policy limiting free speech to just one small area of campus and requiring that activities even in that area be formally scheduled through the Campus Scheduling Office. The policy also provides that “anyone violating this policy may be charged with trespassing.” While free speech zone policies are unfortunately all too common on college campuses, this is the first time FIRE has actually seen a public university threaten students with criminal prosecution simply for exercising their constitutionally protected right to free speech outside of a small designated area or for failing to register their protest or demonstration in advance. This is truly shameful conduct on the part of a university legally bound to uphold its students’ First Amendment rights.
Read Full Article

Saginaw Valley State University

Speech Code of the Month: Saginaw Valley State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for November 2007: Saginaw Valley State University (SVSU). SVSU, a public university in Michigan, maintains a Policy on Discrimination, Sexual Harassment and Racial Harassment that prohibits, among other things, “degrading comments or jokes referring to an individual’s race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, marital or familial status, color, height, weight, handicap or disability.” “Harassment” is an exacting legal standard; most “degrading comments or jokes” do not even approach this standard and are wholly protected by the First Amendment. The notion that adult college students somehow need to be protected this type of speech is ludicrous.
Read Full Article

Lewis-Clark State College

Speech Code of the Month: Lewis-Clark State College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for October 2007: Lewis-Clark State College in Idaho. Lewis-Clark’s student harassment policy provides, in relevant part, that “Any practice by a group or an individual that…embarrasses…a member of the College community…and which occurs on College-owned or controlled property or while the violator is attending or participating in a College-sponsored event or activity is prohibited.” If anything is an embarrassment to the Lewis-Clark “College community,” it is the administration’s ignorance of the First Amendment. This policy is both unconstitutionally overbroad—most speech that might ‘embarrass’ another person is nonetheless entirely constitutionally protected—and fundamentally unfair, since it could never be enforced across the board. There is simply no way that the Lewis-Clark administration could respond to each and every incident of “embarrassment” among the more than 3,000 students on its campus, leaving students vulnerable to arbitrary enforcement by the administration. FIRE is calling on Lewis-Clark State College to repeal this unfair and unconstitutional policy.
Read Full Article

The Ohio State University

Speech Code of the Month: The Ohio State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for September 2007: The Ohio State University. The Office of University Housing at Ohio State, a public university, maintains a Diversity Statement that severely restricts what students in Ohio State’s residence halls can and cannot say. Students are instructed: “Do not joke about differences related to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, ability, socioeconomic background, etc.” It also contains the following cryptic prohibition: “Words, actions, and behaviors that inflict or threaten infliction of bodily or emotional harm, whether done intentionally or with reckless disregard, are not permitted.” This policy both squelches the type of frank expression that often characterizes college student communication and violates students’ constitutional right to free speech.
Read Full Article

University of Iowa

Speech Code of the Month: University of Iowa

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for August 2007: the University of Iowa. The university maintains a website—sexualharassment.uiowa.edu—that defines sexual harassment in a way that violates its students’ First Amendment rights. According to the website, sexual harassment “occurs when somebody says or does something sexually related that you don’t want them to say or do, regardless of who it is.” Examples of such behavior include “[t]elling sexual jokes” and “[t]alking about their sexual experiences.” This is an extremely broad definition that includes a lot of constitutionally protected speech.
Read Full Article

McNeese State University

Speech Code of the Month: McNeese State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for July 2007: McNeese State University. This public university in Louisiana maintains a set of “Public Forum Regulations” that quarantine free speech to just two areas of campus and place onerous restrictions on the use of those areas. In addition, the regulations restrict where students can speak; how frequently they can speak; how long they can speak; and at what times of the day and week they can speak. Finally, they require students to give at least 3 days advance notice in order to speak. There is simply no justification for a public university to place such burdensome restrictions on its students’ constitutionally guaranteed rights to free speech and assembly. Not only would this policy not hold up in a court of law, but it is also a moral outrage.
Read Full Article

Le Moyne College

Speech Code of the Month: Le Moyne College

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for June 2007: Le Moyne College in New York. Despite prominently placed commitments to free speech and academic freedom, the school maintains a policy threatening students with dismissal for making “Stigmatizing or disparaging statements related to race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious preference, age or people with disabilities.” This policy seriously threatens campus discourse by allowing Le Moyne to expel students for expressing any number of controversial opinions. Considering the chilling effect this policy has on robust debate on Le Moyne’s campus and the school’s past record—including the 2005 dismissal of student Scott McConnell for expressing controversial views, which was later overruled by a New York appeals court—FIRE is asking that the school immediately revise this policy.
Read Full Article

Texas A&M University - College Station

Speech Code of the Month: Texas A&M University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for May 2007: Texas A&M University. Texas A&M’s policy on Student Rights and Obligations prohibits students from violating the “rights” of “respect for personal feelings” and “freedom from indignity of any type.” This unconstitutional policy literally prohibits hurting someone’s feelings at Texas A&M University. Legally speaking, this policy is not worth the paper on which it is written. It is overbroad, it is vague, and it conditions the permissibility of speech on subjective listener reaction. Time and time again, courts have held that these types of regulations are unconstitutional. Beyond that, it is an entirely inappropriate policy for a major state university that, in its own words, “depends upon an uninhibited search for truth and its open expression.” Texas A&M is the sixth largest university in the country in terms of enrollment, with over 46,000 enrolled students living under this repressive and unconstitutional policy. FIRE urges Texas A&M to revise this policy immediately.
Read Full Article

Florida Gulf Coast University

Speech Code of the Month: Florida Gulf Coast University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for April 2007: Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU). FGCU's “Personal Abuse” policy prohibits “lewd, indecent, racist, prejudice [sic], obscene, or expressions deemed inappropriate.” This policy prohibits broad categories of constitutionally protected speech, which public universities like FGCU are legally obligated to protect. Moreover, the policy is so broad that it gives an impermissible amount of discretion to the university to decide what constitutes a violation (for example, what exactly is “inappropriate” expression?). FGCU should repeal this repressive and unconstitutional policy immediately.
Read Full Article

Western Michigan University

Speech Code of the Month: Western Michigan University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for March 2007: Western Michigan University (WMU). WMU’s Policy on Sexual Harassment and Sexism actually bans “sexism,” which it defines as “the perception and treatment of any person, not as an individual, but as a member of a category based on sex.” The policy goes on to state that sexism, “[w]hether expressed in overt or subtle form such as sex-related jokes or materials,” will not “be tolerated at Western Michigan University.” WMU cannot lawfully regulate its students “perceptions.” Nor can it lawfully prevent its students from making “sex-related jokes” or any other supposedly sexist remarks, unless students’ speech falls into one of the very narrow categories of speech unprotected by the First Amendment. WMU should repeal this intrusive and unconstitutional policy immediately.  
Read Full Article

Northeastern University

Speech Code of the Month: Northeastern University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for February 2007: Northeastern University in Boston. Northeastern’s Appropriate Use of Computer and Network Resources Policy prohibits students from using Northeastern’s information systems or facilities to send any message that “in the sole judgment of the University” is “intolerant” or “offensive.” It is disturbing that Northeastern—which promises its students the right “to express their views” —maintains a policy that is almost certain to discourage debate on controversial issues. This policy forces students to guess at what the university might punish; in all likelihood, the result is that students will refrain from a great deal of important, protected, but controversial speech in an effort to steer clear of this exceptionally vague policy.
Read Full Article

Fayetteville State University

Speech Code of the Month: Fayetteville State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for January 2007: Fayetteville State University. Fayetteville State's racial harassment policy is identical to a policy that was explicitly declared unconstitutional by a federal court in 1989. If challenged in court, Fayetteville State's policy would almost certainly meet with the same fate.
Read Full Article

Barnard College

Speech Codes of the Year: 2006

As Torch readers know, each month FIRE singles out a particularly egregious speech code for our Speech Code of the Month award. While all twelve Speech Codes of the Month for 2006 were both tragic and laughable, I would like to highlight a few that deserve special mention as our Speech Codes of the Year: Jacksonville State University in Alabama. The student code of conduct at Jacksonville State provides that “No student shall threaten, offend, or degrade anyone on University owned or operated property.” Got that? You may not offend anyone on University property. Barnard College in New York City. The Barnard College Posting Policy provides that “the following words cannot appear on any posted information at Barnard—shit, piss, suck, cunt, fuck, motherfucker, cocksucker and tits.”
Read Full Article

Johns Hopkins University

Speech Code of the Month: Johns Hopkins University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for December 2006: Johns Hopkins University.   Hopkins’ brand new Principles for Ensuring Equity, Civility and Respect for All prohibit “rude, disrespectful behavior” at the university. This policy virtually necessitates abuse, since it is so broad that it could never be enforced across the board, instead leaving students at the whim of the administration. No university could possibly have the resources to prosecute every instance of rudeness that takes place anywhere on its campus.   This policy also stifles free expression on campus, since much legitimate speech is both rude and disrespectful. Michael Moore, anyone? Bill O’Reilly? Passionate arguments about important issues often get heated, and this is something to be cherished in a free society, not repressed.
Read Full Article

University of Maine - Presque Isle

Speech Code of the Month: University of Maine – Presque Isle

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for November 2006: University of Maine – Presque Isle (UMPI). UMPI's Residence Hall Guide contains a harassment policy that states: “Even if the harassment is unintentional (e.g., an off-hand comment or joke) it still occurs and will not be tolerated.” As a public university, UMPI cannot prohibit speech that is protected by the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court has defined what schools may legitimately prohibit as harassment: conduct “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars the victim’s access to an educational opportunity or benefit.” By definition, then, an unintentional, off-hand comment or joke cannot be harassment, making this policy legally untenable.
Read Full Article

University of Mississippi

Speech Code of the Month: University of Mississippi

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for October 2006: University of Mississippi. The University of Mississippi’s General Telephone Policy provides that, on calls made to and from campus telephones, “offensive language is not to be used.” As a state-run university, Ole Miss is legally obligated to uphold the free speech rights guaranteed by the Constitution to its students and faculty. This policy—which is so preposterously broad that students and faculty must necessarily censor themselves in order to comply—directly violates those rights.
Read Full Article

Drexel University

Speech Code of the Month: Drexel University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for September 2006: Drexel University. Drexel's harassment policy, which bans “inconsiderate jokes” and “inappropriately directed laughter,” is a resurrection of an old University of Connecticut speech code that epitomizes the excesses of political correctness. At Drexel, not only won’t they let you tell certain types of jokes, they will even punish you for finding them funny. This is Orwellian thought policing at its worst, and if Drexel cares about the free speech rights of its students and faculty, it should revoke this policy.
Read Full Article

Colorado State University

Speech Code of the Month: Colorado State University

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for August 2006: Colorado State University. Colorado State's Residence Hall Handbook prohibits "expressions of hostility against a person or property because of a person's race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, ability, age, gender, socio-economic status, ethnicity, or sexual orientation." This policy is a clear violation of students' First Amendment rights, which Colorado State—a public university—is legally obligated to uphold. 
Read Full Article

Macalester College

Speech Code of the Month: Macalester College

Macalester College’s Student Handbook promises Macalester students the rights to “free expression” and “free inquiry,” and provides that “[s]tudents and student organizations are free to examine and discuss all questions of interest to them and to express opinions publicly and privately.” Several pages later, however, that same Handbook prohibits “speech acts which are intended to insult or stigmatize an individual or group of individuals on the basis of their race or color, or speech that makes use of inappropriate words or non-verbals.” This policy is a clear violation of Macalester students’ rights to free expression and free inquiry, rights promised in a Student Handbook that explicitly establishes a contractual relationship between the college and its students.
Read Full Article

Orange Coast College

Speech Code of the Month: Coast Community College District

The Coast Community College District consists of three California community colleges with a total enrollment of more than 60,000 students: Coastline Community College, Golden West College, and Orange Coast College. The District maintains a Student Code of Conduct—applicable to students at all three colleges—that is a laundry list of First Amendment violations.
Read Full Article

University of Miami

Speech Code of the Month: University of Miami

The University of Miami’s “Harassment or Harm to Others” policy appears to prohibit almost anything that (even unintentionally) hurts anyone’s feelings. It is sad that the university treats its college students—mostly adults—as little children whose feelings need to be protected at the expense of others’ free speech rights. College is supposed to be a place where you step outside of your comfort zone, not a place where you can be punished for expressing controversial opinions simply because they make someone uncomfortable.
Read Full Article

Barnard College

Speech Code of the Month: Barnard College

Barnard College’s Posting Policy deserves special recognition because it accomplishes the unique feat of violating itself. The speech code prohibits any of George Carlin’s famous “Seven Dirty Words” from appearing on any posted information at Barnard. The actual policy lists each of those words; therefore, posting a copy of the Policy anywhere on Barnard’s campus would itself be a violation of the Policy! Although Barnard is a private institution, it advertises itself as a place where students “are encouraged to openly express their views and opinions.” Sometimes, however, people express strong opinions in strong terms. If Barnard is truly the center of higher learning that it claims to be, it shouldn’t be afraid of a few dirty words.
Read Full Article

Davidson College

Speech Code of the Month: Davidson College

Davidson College’s Sexual Harassment Policy prohibits the use of “patronizing remarks” such as “referring to an adult as ‘girl,’ ‘boy,’ ‘hunk,’ ‘doll,’ ‘honey,’” or “sweetie” and further prohibits “comments or inquiries about dating.” This policy explicitly bans so much speech and expression that students must watch everything they say or do to make sure they do not run afoul of it. That results in an unacceptable “chilling effect” on speech.
Read Full Article

Jacksonville State University

Speech Code of the Month: Jacksonville State University

Jacksonville State University in Alabama maintains one of the most illegally overbroad—not to mention simply inane—speech codes that we have ever seen. The student code of conduct provides that “No student shall threaten, offend, or degrade anyone on University owned or operated property.” The only way for students to ensure they are in compliance with this policy is to remain in complete silence. The university is treading on very thin ice with this flagrantly unconstitutional policy.
Read Full Article

Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts

Speech Code of the Month: Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts

The Student Handbook at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, a public institution bound by the First Amendment, contains a Picketing Policy that is both absurd and unconstitutional. The policy could easily be used to suppress almost any student demonstration.
Read Full Article

Stevens Institute of Technology

Speech Code of the Month: Stevens Institute of Technology

Although the Stevens Institute of Technology is a private institution, it promises its students “[t]he constitutional rights of freedom of expression and assembly” and “the right of freedom to hear and participate in dialogue and to examine diverse views and ideas.” Unfortunately, Stevens maintains a sexual harassment policy that strips students of the very rights it promises.
Read Full Article

Lincoln University

Speech Code of the Month: Lincoln University

Lincoln University defines sexual harassment as “unwelcome and unsolicited sexual advances, request for sexual favors or other verbal, visual or physical conduct or communication with sexual overtones that the victim deems offensive” (emphasis added). This policy shamelessly violates clearly established Supreme Court precedent regarding harassment.
Read Full Article

Northern Arizona University

Speech Code of the Month: Northern Arizona University

Northern Arizona University, a public institution, maintains a Safe Working and Learning Environment Policy that not only explicitly prohibits constitutionally protected speech, but also contains a gross misstatement of the law.
Read Full Article

University of Nevada, Reno

Speech Code of the Month: University of Nevada at Reno

The University of Nevada at Reno is a public institution, legally bound to uphold the constitutional rights of its students. Yet the university maintains a blatantly unconstitutional speech code for its residence halls, prohibiting, among other things, “offensive language.”
Read Full Article

Richard Stockton College of New Jersey

Speech Code of the Month: Richard Stockton College of New Jersey

As a public institution, the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution. Its anti-harassment policy, however, infringes upon protected speech and is particularly outrageous because it explicitly infringes upon the free exchange of ideas in the classroom.
Read Full Article

The College of Idaho

Speech Code of the Month: Albertson College of Idaho

The Albertson College Student Handbook’s harassment policy states that “[a]ny comments or conduct relating to a person’s race, gender, religion, disability, age or ethnic background that fail to respect the dignity and feelings of the individual are unacceptable.” The Handbook also provides that “[a]ll inappropriate behaviors may not be specifically covered in the misconduct definitions, and students will be held accountable for behaviors considered inconsistent with the standards and expectations described in this handbook.” These provisions are wholly inconsistent with freedom.
Read Full Article

Rhodes College

Speech Code of the Month: Rhodes College

The Rhodes College Policy on Discrimination and Harassment states that “[f]reedom of expression does not include the right to intentionally and maliciously aggravate, intimidate, ridicule or humiliate another person.” Few colleges and universities are bold enough to make an explicit statement about free expression that directly contradicts U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Parody and satire—which often intentionally and maliciously ridicule and humiliate their targets—enjoy the strongest constitutional protection.
Read Full Article