Red Light Policies

• Policy IT-7: Email Policy

  Speech Code Category: Internet Usage Policies
  Last updated: August 31, 2016

  Abuse of Email Privileges

  Use of email is a privilege, not a right. This privilege can be revoked. Unacceptable behavior includes, but is not limited to:

  . . .

  2. Use of offensive language

  . . .

  4. Threats

  . . .

  Penalties for unacceptable behavior range from de-activation of the account (for minor first offenses) through university judicial action or referral to law enforcement authorities.

  » Read More

---

• Policy OED-3: Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Misconduct Policy

  Speech Code Category: Harassment Policies
  Last updated: August 31, 2016

  Sexual Harassment: Sexual harassment is any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favors, or other unwelcome verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when: … Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work or academic performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, humiliating, demeaning, or sexually offensive working, academic or social environment. The effect will be evaluated based on the perspective of a reasonable person in the position of a Complainant.

  …

  Examples of behavior that might be considered sexual or gender-based harassment or misconduct include, but are not limited to:

  • Unwanted or inappropriate sexual innuendo, propositions, sexual attention or suggestive comments; humor and jokes about sex or gender-specific traits; sexual slurs or derogatory language directed at another person’s sexuality or gender; insults and threats based on sex or gender; and other verbal, written or electronic communications of a sexual nature that an individual communicates is unwanted and unwelcome;
  • Non-academic display or circulation of written materials or pictures degrading to an individual(s) or gender group (It is expected that instructors will offer appropriate warning regarding the introduction of explicit and triggering materials used in the classroom.) …
  • Engaging in demeaning verbal and other expressive behavior of a sexual or gendered nature in instructional settings.

  » Read More

• Policy OED-1: Equality and Non-Discrimination Policy

  Speech Code Category: Harassment Policies
  Last updated: August 31, 2016

  Sexual Harassment: unwelcome physical or verbal conduct of a sexual nature that can include sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and offensive sexual behavior or comments.

  . . .

  Hostile Environment Harassment: verbal or physical conduct based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability, age, status as a veteran or disabled veteran, gender identity or expression, retaliation, and any other characteristic prohibited by law (i.e., creed, marital status, citizenship status) that is severe or pervasive enough to create an intimidating, threatening, or abusive environment.

  Examples of behaviors that may constitute hostile environment harassment include, but are not limited to:

  • intimidating or hostile acts
  • epithets
  • slurs
  • unwelcome touching or hugging
  • denigrating jokes
  • display or circulation of written or graphic material that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward an individual or group.

  » Read More

• Code of Conduct: Posting

  Speech Code Category: Posting and Distribution Policies
  Last updated: August 31, 2016

  Fliers and posters may be hung throughout the campus on approved posting locations only. All materials for posting must be stamped prior to distribution.

  […]

  Any materials of an explicit sexual nature are prohibited as well as materials that may be viewed as demeaning or degrading to a person or group of persons.

  » Read More

• Code of Conduct: Detrimental Behavior

  Speech Code Category: Other Speech Codes
  Last updated: August 31, 2016

  Should the conduct or action of a student, or group of students, be detrimental to the general welfare of the University, regardless of whether such conduct is specifically prohibited by any University policy, rule, regulation, or standard of conduct, such student or group of students shall be immediately subject to disciplinary action in accordance with the University’s conduct process.

  » Read More

---

• Policy IT-1: Acceptable Use Policy

  Speech Code Category: Internet Usage Policies
  Last updated: August 31, 2016

  The following activities are specifically prohibited:

  . . .

  Users may not possess, distribute or send unlawful communications of any kind, including but not limited to threats of violence, obscenity, child pornography and/or harassing communications (as defined by law), or participate or facilitate communications in furtherance of other illegal activities.

  » Read More

---

• Several Colleges Require Faculty to Use Trigger Warnings – Just Not Explicitly

  August 31, 2016

  By Greg Piper at The College Fix Think the University of Chicago was overreacting when it told incoming students that “we do not support so-called ‘trigger warnings,’” and that it’s actually an infringement of academic freedom to tell professors they can’t use them in class (which UChicago did not in fact do)?… Read more here.

  » Read More

• Critics of U. Chicago Say Trigger Warnings Aren’t Mandatory. Here’s Proof They’re Wrong.

  August 31, 2016

  By Robby Soave at Reason The University of Chicago’s statement to incoming students decrying trigger warnings, safe spaces, and speaker dis-invitations generated much praise from supporters of free expression on campus—but also significant criticism from those who say trigger warnings just aren’t that big of a deal… Read more here.

  » Read More

• Temple, Drexel Codes Restrict Free Speech

  August 19, 2015

  By Azhar Majeed and Max Levy at Philly.com In Philadelphia, a city that cherishes its history and is the proud birthplace of the Constitution, one would think that institutions of higher education would honor First Amendment rights on campus. Yet when it comes to students’ and professors’ freedom of speech, Drexel University and Temple University stand out for all the wrong reasons. As a new academic year beckons, it’s well past time for that to change. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which was founded in Philadelphia in 1999, defends free-speech and other individual rights of college students […]

  » Read More

• Colleges have free speech on the run

  November 30, 2012

   In 2007, Keith John Sampson, a middle-aged student working his way through Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis as a janitor, was declared guilty of racial harassment. Without granting Sampson a hearing, the university administration — acting as prosecutor, judge and jury — convicted him of “openly reading [a] book related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject.” “Openly.” “Related to.” Good grief. The book, “Notre Dame vs. the Klan,” celebrated the 1924 defeat of the Ku Klux Klan in a fight with Notre Dame students. But some of Sampson’s co-workers disliked the book’s cover, which featured a black-and-white photograph of a Klan […]

  » Read More

• Drexel, West Chester weak on free-speech protection

  December 20, 2007

  A report issued by a Philadelphia-based civil liberties organization shows 75 percent of U.S. colleges and universities have policies restricting the free speech rights of students on campus. The report, which was published by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), surveyed 346 institutions of higher education. “With increased resources and enhanced research techniques, FIRE was able to unearth even more of these unlawful and pervasive policies than those included in last year’s report,” FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. Last year FIRE conducted it first nationwide investigation into speech codes, surveying 360 universities, and found 68 percent restricted speech […]

  » Read More

• Campus Alert: Don’t laugh too hard

  May 21, 2007

  How would you feel if you got in trouble not for telling an off-color joke, but simply for laughing at one? Sounds inconceivable, right? Not at Drexel University in Philadelphia, where school policy prohibits not only “inconsiderate jokes” but also “inappropriately directed laughter.” Not only won’t they let you tell certain jokes, they promise to punish you for finding them funny. Drexel is not alone in its prohibition of what can only be described as typical college student interaction. Northeastern University in Boston, apparently the self-appointed arbiter of good taste, prohibits sending any e-mail message “which in the sole judgment […]

  » Read More

• Mandatory Trigger Warnings, Part Two

  September 1, 2016

  Yesterday, I reported on several university Title IX/sexual misconduct policies I found that appear to require professors to use trigger warnings. This discovery runs contrary to the assertion—made in the wake of the University of Chicago’s recent denunciation of trigger warnings—that no university has ever mandated their use. Specifically, language in force at Drexel University and several other institutions states that “[i]t is expected that instructors will offer appropriate warning and accommodation regarding the introduction of explicit and triggering materials used.” City University of New York (CUNY) professor Angus Johnston disagrees that this language is mandatory. Johnston suggests that in […]

  » Read More

• Think Trigger Warnings Are Never Mandatory on Campus? Think Again.

  August 31, 2016

  Last week, the University of Chicago (UChicago) sent a letter to incoming students affirming the university’s commitment to robust and even uncomfortable dialogue and debate on campus. While many—including FIRE—lauded the university’s statement, some critics argued that the letter’s statement that it does not support “so-called ‘trigger warnings’” was unnecessary since no universities actually mandate trigger warnings. For example, the New Republic’s Jeet Heer accused UChicago of “attacking academic freedom,” quoting a tweet from City University of New York professor Angus Johnston: A professor’s use of trigger warnings isn’t a threat to academic freedom. It’s a MANIFESTATION of academic freedom. […]

  » Read More

• FIRE’s Azhar Majeed Urges Drexel and Temple to Abolish Speech Codes in ‘Philadelphia Inquirer’

  August 19, 2015

  Today, The Philadelphia Inquirer features an op-ed co-authored by FIRE’s Individual Rights Education Program Director Azhar Majeed, identifying unconstitutional and illiberal speech codes at Temple University and Drexel University and calling on university administrators to abolish them. Azhar and co-author Max Levy (a Drexel alum) write that despite the universities’ location in freedom-loving Philadelphia, “both Drexel and Temple have missed the mark for years” when it comes to restricting student speech through speech codes: These codes prevent students from speaking freely, cast a chill over campus discussion and dialogue, and threaten disciplinary action for speech and expressive activity that should […]

  » Read More

• Drexel Student Calls On Administration to Rescind Speech Codes

  October 26, 2009

  Drexel Student Liberty Front is an active libertarian student organization at Drexel University in Philadelphia. During the last week of September, the Student Liberty Front hosted three FIRE speakers for “Students Rights Week” and passed out FIRE’s Guides to Student Rights on Campus. The group continues to advocate for students’ rights. Last week, Student Liberty Front Vice President Stacy Litz published an op-ed in The Triangle, the Drexel student paper, which was critical of the university’s speech codes. In her column, she calls on the university to rescind its illiberal policies and join the eleven other colleges and universities in […]

  » Read More

• Slow Progress Toward Free Speech at Drexel University: Speech Code of the Month Revised, but Concerns Remain

  November 20, 2008

  In a positive development for free speech, Drexel University has revised its much-maligned student harassment policy. The policy, which prohibited “the use of derogatory names” as well as “inconsiderate jokes,” was named FIRE’s Speech Code of the Month back in September 2006. We publicized the policy in the media and on The Torch, and also featured it in our video FIRE on Campus: An Introduction to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. With its revised policy, Drexel no longer receives FIRE’s worst, red-light rating for suppressing student speech; it now receives a yellow light. However, Drexel still has some […]

  » Read More

• ‘The Bulletin’ on Speech Code Report

  December 21, 2007

  Philadelphia newspaper The Bulletin has an article about FIRE’s 2007 speech codes report, Spotlight on Speech Codes 2007: The State of Free Speech on our Nation’s Campuses. The article focuses on Philadelphia-area schools in particular, noting that both Drexel University and West Chester University get poor, “red light” ratings for suppressing student speech. Drexel, Torch readers may remember, has a particularly egregious speech code, banning both “inconsiderate jokes” and “inappropriately directed laughter” (whatever that means). Thanks to The Bulletin for helping bring these ridiculous policies to the public’s attention.

  » Read More

• Today’s ‘Campus Alert’: Don’t Laugh Too Hard

  May 21, 2007

  Our weekly Campus Alert column in the New York Post focuses today on speech codes at Drexel University, Northeastern University, and Johns Hopkins University—all of which have been named FIRE’s Speech Code of the Month for banning constitutionally protected expression on their respective campuses.   Drexel, which was given the dubious honor of being recognized as FIRE’s Speech Code of the Month for September 2006, prohibits not only “inconsiderate jokes,” but also “inappropriately directed laughter.” So students can be punished not only for telling a joke some may find offensive, but also merely for laughing at one. Not so funny […]

  » Read More

• Speech Codes of the Year: 2006

  December 29, 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. […]

  » Read More

• Kaminer: No Laughing Allowed

  November 27, 2006

  FIRE Board of Advisors member Wendy Kaminer writes an engaging and thoughtful op-ed in the December 2006/January 2007 issue of Free Inquiry magazine. Kaminer draws attention to former FIRE Speech Codes of the Month, including Drexel University (September 2006) and Colorado State University (August 2006), writing: Speech codes that prohibit people from insulting each other have been widely and rightly ridiculed, but they continue to proliferate, enforcing particular notions of diversity, equality, and tolerance. Consider Colorado State University’s speech code, recently derided by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) as speech code of the month. At Colorado State, […]

  » Read More

• ‘Ned Flanders, Marty McFly unwelcome at Drexel University’

  October 9, 2006

  Check out FIRE’s own Luke Sheahan’s op ed in The Triangle Online, the web edition of Drexel University’s student newspaper. Drexel had the dubious distinction of being September’s Speech Code of the Month.  Its policies ban “the use of derogatory names,” “inconsiderate jokes” and “inappropriately directed laughter.”  As Luke points out: What is an “inconsiderate joke”? Pretty much any joke that is funny. Jokes make light of someone or something. So at Drexel, not only can you not tell a joke (since it would almost always be considered inconsiderate by someone, somewhere), but you can’t laugh at one either (since […]

  » Read More

• Ned Flanders, Marty McFly unwelcome at Drexel University

  October 6, 2006

  “You’re an ugly, hate-filled man,” said Ned Flanders to Moe on The Simpsons. It was a good thing Ned was speaking on television rather than at Drexel University; if he had been speaking at Drexel, he would be a harasser! Flanders would have violated Drexel’s harassment policy by referring to the ugly, hate-filled Springfield bar owner as, well, ugly and hate-filled. Drexel’s wildly overbroad harassment policy prohibits such things as “the use of derogatory names,” “inconsiderate jokes” and “inappropriately directed laughter.” This ridiculous overreach is why Drexel University’s harassment policy was given the dubious distinction of September’s Speech Code of […]

  » Read More

• Speech Code of the Month: Drexel University

  September 1, 2006

  FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for September 2006: Drexel University. There are some trends that, once they go out of style the first time, should never be revived. But some people won’t learn. In the fashion world, for example, leggings and high-waisted, tapered-leg “mom jeans” have (to my horror) regained popularity. And in the world of academia, Drexel University has resurrected an old University of Connecticut speech code from 1989 that has long been skewered as a prime example of political correctness run amok. Drexel University’s harassment policy bans “inconsiderate jokes” and “inappropriately directed laughter.” (I don’t […]

  » Read More