Location: Fayetteville, North Carolina
Federal Circuit: 4th Circuit
Fayetteville State University has been given the speech code rating Yellow. Yellow light colleges and universities are those institutions with at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application. Read more here.
January 10, 2006
FIRE teamed up with the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy to release the Report on the State of the First Amendment in the University of North Carolina System. The Report notes that UNC System’s many speech codes and illiberal restrictions on religious groups would likely not survive a legal challenge. It also reveals that “13 out of the 16 schools in the UNC System have at least one policy that both clearly and substantially restricts freedom of speech.”» Read More
benefit on submission to sexual conduct. This type of sexual harassment involves
conduct that is sufficiently serious enough to interfere with an individual's work,
academic performance, or social living.
Speech or conduct of a sexual or hostile nature that occurs in the context of
educational instruction may constitute prohibited sexual harassment if it meets
the definition of sexual harassment noted above and (1) is reasonably regarded as
non-professional speech (i.e., advances a personal interest of the faculty member
as opposed to furthering the learning process or legitimate objectives of the
course) or (2) lacks accepted pedagogical purpose or is not related to the
academic subject matter.
unwelcome sexual advances, request for sexual favors, and other verbal or
physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when: ... such conduct hasthe purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an
individual's work performance, academic activities or student experience, or
creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working, academic or student
conduct that is (1) directed toward a particular person or persons, (2) unwelcomed, (3) based upon the person’s race, color, religion, national origin, sex,
gender, sexual orientation, gender-identity, creed, disability, or veteran status,
(4) severe or pervasive, and (5) so objectively offensive that it unreasonably
interferes with the target person’s employment, academic pursuits, or participation in University-sponsored activities such that it effectively denies equal
access to the University’s resources and opportunities.
October 24, 2012
This fall, FIRE is writing a blog series about how schools can reform their problematic speech codes and earn a “green light” rating from FIRE—a distinction currently awarded to just 16 of the more than 400 schools in our Spotlight database but one we hope to be able to award to many more in the years to come. So far, we have discussed how universities restrict speech by mandating “civility” and by improperly broadening the definition of “harassment.” (Harassment, while not protected speech, is a term with a very specific legal meaning.) Today we tackle another common problem: restrictions on […]» Read More
September 22, 2008
In January 2006, FIRE and the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy released a Report on the State of the First Amendment in the University of North Carolina System. The report took an in-depth look at the speech codes in force at each of the sixteen universities in the UNC System and made detailed recommendations for how those codes could be improved. At the time, 13 of the 16 schools in the system received a “red-light” rating from FIRE for maintaining policies that clearly and substantially restricted students’ right to freedom of speech. Happily, a number of the […]» Read More
November 9, 2007
This week’s Clarion Call, the weekly column of the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy, highlights FIRE’s speech code victory at Fayetteville State University. Fayetteville State’s Code of Student Conduct was picked as FIRE’s Speech Code of the Month for January 2007. It defined racial harassment as: [V]erbal or physical behavior that stigmatizes or victimizes an individual on the basis of race and involves an express or implied threat to another person’s academic pursuits or participation in activities sponsored by the University or organizations or groups related to the University. It was identical to a University of Michigan […]» Read More