Location: Swarthmore, Pennsylvania
Federal Circuit: 3rd Circuit
Swarthmore College has been given the speech code rating Red. A red light university has at least one policy that both clearly and substantially restricts freedom of speech. Read more here.
Red Light Policies
Harassment is defined as unwelcome conduct that is based on an individual’s sex, race, color, age, religion, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, veteran status, medical condition, pregnancy, disability, or any other legally protected status.
Harassing, demeaning, uncivil expression, or threats of violence, whether anonymous or signed, will be washed away or removed without notice.
Sexual harassment is any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favors, or other unwanted verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when one or more of the following conditions are present: … Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work or academic performance, i.e. it is sufficiently serious, pervasive, or persistent as to create an intimidating, hostile, humiliating, demeaning, or sexually offensive working, academic, residential, or social environment under both an objective and subjective standard.
Sexual harassment also includes harassment based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, which may include acts of verbal, nonverbal, or physical aggression, intimidation, or hostility based on sex/gender or sex/gender-stereotyping, even if the acts do not involve conduct of a sexual nature.
Individuals with access to the Swarthmore College network have the following obligations and responsibilities:
- To respect other people and the College’s intellectual environment. Use of the network may not violate federal, state, or local law, including the laws of defamation, forgery, copyright/trademark infringement, and harassment. The copying or serving of copyrighted material such as music, movies, and other multimedia is strictly forbidden.
Membership in the academic community imposes on students, faculty members, administrators, and trustees an obligation to respect the dignity of others, to acknowledge their right to express differing opinions, and to foster and defend intellectual honesty, freedom of inquiry and instruction, and free expression on and off the campus. The right of students to exercise free expression, including peaceful dissent, orderly demonstrations, protests, and picketing, will be respected.
Bullying includes any intentional electronic, written, verbal, or physical act, or a series of acts, directed at another person or group of people, that is severe, persistent, or pervasive and that has the effect of doing any of the following:
(i) substantially interfering with a student’s education;
(ii) creating a threatening environment; or
(iii) substantially disrupting the orderly operation of the school. Bullying is prohibited and participating in such acts will result in disciplinary action.
Verbal, written, or electronic threats of violence or other threatening behavior directed toward another person or group that reasonably leads the person(s) in the group to fear for her/his physical well-being constitutes intimidation, is prohibited, and will result in disciplinary action.
Anyone who attempts to use bullying or intimidation to retaliate against someone who reports an incident, brings a complaint, or participates in an investigation in an attempt to influence the judicial process will be subject to disciplinary action.
April 29, 2013
I recently read that the people who run Swarthmore College, one of America’s most progressive, diverse and elite educational institutions are covering up sex crimes against their female students. Can this be true? And if so, who do these college administrators think they are? The Catholic Church? A formal complaint has been lodged against the school for failing to report numerous sex crimes on campus as the administration is required to do by federal law. That law is the Clery Act, and Mia Ferguson, class of 2015, says Swarthmore is in direct violation of it. And she isn’t the only […]» Read More
December 31, 2012
Looking back at what 2012 had in store for the fight for free speech and basic rights on campus, the best I can say is that it was a mixed bag. There were some encouraging signs along the way, but also many setbacks. For instance, for the fifth straight year, my organization (the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE) found a decrease in the number of campus speech codes. This is good news. However, it sounds a little less exciting when you realize that a pretty miserable 62 percent of top colleges maintain what FIRE dubs “red light” (read: very bad) […]» Read More
October 10, 2013
Torch readers will already be familiar with some of the procedural safeguards generally missing from sexual misconduct cases tried by campus judiciaries, as well as recent allegations that some college officials are withholding evidence and presuming the guilt of accused students. But on Tuesday, the Swarthmore College student newspaper Swarthmore Independent shed light on another worrying aspect of collegiate procedures in hearings involving allegations of sexual misconduct: At Swarthmore, volunteers are solicited to serve on hearing panels in a manner that compromises the impartiality of the panels. According to the Independent, all Swarthmore students were emailed application forms for the college’s Sexual Assault and Harassment Hearing Panel. Each panel will be […]» Read More
January 25, 2013
This winter, FIRE is presenting a blog series on the state of free speech at America’s top 10 liberal arts colleges, as ranked by U.S. News & World Report. So far, we have covered speech codes at Williams College and at Amherst College. Today, we will discuss speech codes at U.S. News‘ third-ranked liberal arts college: Swarthmore College. Swarthmore is the first school in this blog series to receive a “red light” rating, which means that it maintains at least one policy that both clearly and substantially prohibits what would otherwise be protected expression. Although Swarthmore is private, its Student […]» Read More
January 5, 2007
Emmett Hogan is a student at University of Michigan Law School and a luminary early FIRE employee. As we looked back on 2006 in campus rights and abuses I wanted to check in with him for his thoughts on the past year in FIRE history. This was his thoughtful response: One of FIRE’s most gripping cases from 2006 involved a breathtaking exercise in thought reform by Michigan State University. FIRE publicly challenged what MSU calls a “Student Accountability in Community Seminar” (SAC) which is intended to address student behavior that administrators consider unacceptable; the seminar is successful only when it […]» Read More