Location: Storrs Mansfield, Connecticut
Federal Circuit: 2nd Circuit
University of Connecticut 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
Student Code: Information Regarding Sexual Misconduct, Relationship Violence and Stalking Cases Reported to Community Standards 14-15
Speech Code Category: Harassment Policies
Sexual Harassment is any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature. It can include unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, such as sexual assault or acts of sexual violence. Sexual harassment also may include inappropriate touching, suggestive comments and public display of pornographic or suggestive calendars, posters, or signs where such images are not connected to any academic purpose. All forms of sexual and sex-based harassment and discrimination are considered serious offenses by the University. A violation of The Student Code will be found where: (a) submission to sexual harassment of any kind is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment, performance appraisal, or evaluation of academic performance; or (b) these actions have the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive learning or working environment. Sexual harassment creates a hostile environment when the harassment is sufficiently severe or pervasive to deny or limit a student’s or employee’s ability to participate in or benefit from the academic or work environment.
Examples of sexual harassment include, but are not limited to:’
- Unwelcome sexual advances
- Requests or attempts to extort sexual favors
- Sexual violence
- Inappropriate touching
- Suggestive comments
- Public display of pornographic or suggestive calendars, posters, or signs
- Acts that do not necessarily involve conduct of a sexual nature but are based on sex or sex-stereotyping and which may include physical aggression, intimidation or hostility are considered gender-harassment and are similarly prohibited.
Speech Code Category: Posting Policies
Residential Life reserves the right to not approve any posting due to space or time limitation, or inappropriate content.
Speech Code Category: Harassment Policies
Harming behavior which includes, but is not limited to, the true threat of or actual physical assault or abuse; stalking; bullying; and/or harassment. In determining whether an act constitutes harassment, Community Standards will consider the full context of any given incident, giving due consideration to the protection of University climate, individual rights, freedom of speech, academic freedom and advocacy. Please note that not every act that might be offensive to an individual or a group necessarily will be considered as harassment and/or a violation of The Student Code.
Speech Code Category: Protest and Demonstration Policies
An organization event is defined as any activity or gathering that can be reasonably associated with an organization by one or more of the following:
- a significant number of attendees are members of an organization;
- the event, activity, gathering is held at a location reserved for, owned by, rented by, or otherwise associated with an organization;
- promotional material associates the event, activity, or gathering with a specific organization;
- the activities can be reasonably associated with a particular organization
All student organization events using any University facility must be registered in advance with the Student Union Event Services Office in the Student Union. Such event registration may require approval in advance from the Student Union and/or other University departments.
Speech Code Category: Harassment Policies
Discriminatory harassment consists of offensive behavior directed at an individual or group based upon an individual’s race, color, ethnicity, religious creed, age, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, genetic information, physical or mental disabilities (including learning disabilities, intellectual disability, past/present history of a mental disorder), veteran status, prior conviction of a crime, workplace hazards to reproductive systems, gender identity or expression, or membership in other protected classes set forth in state or federal law. Harassing conduct may take many forms, including verbal acts, name-calling, graphic or written statements (including the use of cell phones or the Internet), or other conduct that may be humiliating or physically threatening.
A violation of this policy will be found where: (a) submission to harassment of any kind is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment, performance appraisal, or evaluation of academic performance; or (b) these actions have the effect of creating a hostile learning or working environment. Discriminatory harassment creates a hostile environment when the harassment is sufficiently severe, pervasive, or persistent to deny, limit or unreasonably interfere with a student’s or employee’s ability to participate in or benefit from the academic or work environment.
Speech Code Category: Advertised Commitments to Free Expression
The right of expression includes the right to dissent. The University recognizes a fundamental obligation to protect this aspect of free expression on campus.
January 21, 2014
by Alec Torres The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) released its annual report on college-campus speech codes last week finding that while the percentage of colleges that seriously infringe upon students’ free-speech rights has diminished in recent years, many universities still burden students with overbearing and sometimes ridiculous speech regulations. Here’s a look at some of the most egregious speech codes that FIRE found: The University of Connecticut requires that “every member of the University shall refrain from actions that intimidate, humiliate, or demean persons or groups, or that undermine their security or self-esteem.” At Athens State University in Alabama, […]» Read More
December 13, 2005
Remember this maxim: when a liberal says something outrageous, it’s a courageous embrace of First Amendment freedoms, intended to catalyze discussion; when a conservative does the same, it is hate speech. This is the lesson liberals at the University of Connecticut (UConn) were attempting to teach students until last Wednesday, when they went too far by repeatedly interrupting Ann Coulter’s remarks. Now, students are rebuking their liberal counter-parts. “I wasn’t irritated in the least, inasmuch as this happens at every campus,” Coulter told TAS, adding, “except the prestigious ones in the northeast and campuses in the south, interestingly.” She wasn’t […]» Read More
November 7, 2005
By Suzanne Fields at Townhall.com What do the Bible and the “The Vagina Monologues” have in common? Not much. But surely we can all agree that both are covered by the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of religion and freedom of expression. Well, that’s not so at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. At UWEC you can live in a dorm and watch a performance of “The Vagina Monologues,” but you can’t join a Bible studies group. Any resident assistant, or RA, as the live-in student counselors are called, can put on a performance of the play, and one has, but leading […]» Read More
September 1, 2005
Given the section you are reading, it should come as no surprise that I describe myself as a very opinionated person. But, as somewhat of a pessimist, my columns usually focus on what’s wrong with policy X or ideology Y, and my usual targets are conservative, right-wing issues. I tend to focus on criticizing the right-wing because of its current political prominence. However, I have a confession to make: There are many liberal left-wing ideas I’m equally unimpressed with, but haven’t written about. For example, I disapprove of gay adoptions, believe immigration laws should be inflexible and feel popular feminists […]» Read More
June 1, 2005
We hear a lot these days about the importance of diversity in ensuring that ideas are heard fairly. But the individuals who are most insistent about this are interested only in racial and sex diversity. Intellectual and ideological diversity is not what the enforcers of political correctness on campuses and other sectors have in mind. This magazine has helped pioneer evidence of how politically unbalanced most college campuses have become. Most recently (see our January/February 2005 issue) we presented the findings of University of California economist Daniel Klein, who found that the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in social sciences […]» Read More
October 26, 2010
About a month ago, two controversial comics were printed in the University of Connecticut’s student-run newspaper The Daily Campus. One, titled “Victory Lap!,” shows baseball players agreeing that girls are really made of “crabs, scrabs, and everything viral,” while the other, “Milksteak and Jellybeans,” shows a man tricking a woman into having sexual relations with him by convincing her to chase a ring he throws into the bedroom. In response, student reactions have been strong, producing the kind of debate students should engage in. (The Hartford Courant provides an excellent summary.) As for the The Daily Campus, Editor-in-Chief John Kennedy defended the student’s […]» Read More
November 14, 2007
It has long been FIRE’s position that professors have every protection of the First Amendment in their public statements and scholarship. FIRE has released statements defending the rights of Professors Ward Churchill and Sami Al-Arian to express their controversial views publicly. Universities do have a prerogative to regulate professors’ speech within the classroom to a certain extent; for example, a professor teaching a calculus class could be forbidden from substituting lectures on American foreign policy for lectures on derivatives. However, some non-mathematics related expression must be acceptable if academic freedom is to be preserved. Last year FIRE defended Professor Peter […]» Read More
November 6, 2007
Today’s issue of The Review, the University of Delaware’s student newspaper, has four stories about the Residence Life reeducation program, plus two letters to the editor and an editorial supporting FIRE’s position. The editors seem to understand the issues: While the program may have had good intentions, its execution was inappropriate and culpability falls on Residence Life and on the resident assistants who allowed themselves to be used as unquestioning instruments of the program and its ideology. Additionally, the type of language used by Residence Life staff and printed in its own educational materials promotes a position that is […]» Read More
January 25, 2007
An article in today’s Hartford Courant explains how University of Connecticut Law School students recently had an off-campus theme party reminiscent of Hopkins’ ill-fated “Halloween in the Hood” party. The UConn students posted photos from their “Bullets and Bubbly” party on Facebook.com, upsetting many students, faculty, and administrators, who found the party’s theme racially insensitive. UConn Interim Dean Kurt Strasser has scheduled a roundtable for this afternoon at 12:15 so that members of the UConn community can discuss the party. Newly minted Dean of the Law School Jeremy Paul told the Courant that “[c]learly this is an unfortunate incident,” and […]» Read More
December 14, 2005
FIRE recently wrote a letter to John Churchill, secretary of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, in which we ask the organization to stand behind its stated commitment to freedom of expression by addressing the issue of repressive speech codes at its member institutions. In a recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription required), Churchill responded that although Phi Beta Kappa is “interested in freedom of inquiry and freedom of expression,” the society does not “undertake that kind of investigative activity.” Apparently, the society has the resources to conduct a “rigorous three-year review” of prospective member institutions that includes […]» Read More
August 3, 2005
Terry Caesar penned a column Monday on Inside Higher Ed lamenting the chilling effect speech codes have on professorial humor. Citing one of FIRE’s favorite examples, the former speech code at the University of Connecticut, he wrote: To relate an official response to some example of a joke, or even an unintended joke, on American campuses today is itself to appear to be telling a joke. Yet everybody knows speech codes that ban “inappropriately directed laughter” (say) are no joke. It’s not clear to me if a professor can be held accountable for a student who spontaneously tells a joke […]» Read More
March 17, 2005
When it comes to spanking, there’s no such thing as a consensus in America’s schools. Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia have outlawed corporal punishment in public schools, all in the past 40 years. But as the number of students feeling the sting of the paddle declines, some parents and educators are digging in to defend it as an effective form of discipline. It’s another symbol of the nation’s red-blue divide. Most states that still allow the practice are in the South and Midwest. But policies long favoring corporal punishment have come up for debate recently on Southern school […]» Read More
October 14, 2004
In an effort by a group of UConn faculty, administrators and students to create the University of Connecticut Creed, a lecture on speech codes and freedom of speech on college campuses was held. The lecture, held Wednesday at the Dodd Center, focused on the student value of respecting the dignity and rights of others. According to Associate Vice President for Students Affairs Sam Miller, the event was just one of many seminars and lectures the university plans to have that elucidate five value statements, which are the focus of a recent effort to create a basic code for students to […]» Read More