University shortchanges students on speech policy

A recent email about the code of conduct was left untouched in most students inboxes, yet the new changes to Loyolas Student Code of Conduct are some of the largest inroads for students to voice their opinions on campus.

Our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom to assemble are largely up to Loyola to interpret. Because Loyola is a private university, it can set its own standards to restrict students First Amendment rights. Although some changes seem inconsequential, others seem to attempt to stifle students voices.

The university altered the definition of assembly in its Student Code of Conduct. The guidelines explain that the act of two or more people protesting is considered a public expression.

This terminology seems to add some ambiguity to these guidelines. Would controversial T-shirts count as a public statement? Furthermore, two students who want to hand out flyers encouraging voter registration, or flyers condemning a university practice, would be severely restricted by this change in language. This new terminology is confusing and was created to give Loyola the power to determine what behaviors are too controversial.

There are also new stipulations on where Loyola students can assemble. The new guidelines state that demonstrations will be considered disruptive if they occur inside university buildings other than the Damen Student Center and Terry Student Center. This seriously limits the number of people that can protest at one time.

It is not a new practice for universities to designate areas for protesters, which are most commonly called designated public forums. However, the problem with the locations Loyola has designated is the serious space and location restrictions. Living southwest of campus, I rarely make it to the Damen Student Center, and a good deal of upperclassmen and commuter students most likely dont either.

The only open area in the Terry Student Center would be the entrance lounge area, which would severely block traffic since it is a stairwell, the entrance to Ninas Cafe and the entrance to Baumhart Hall. A protest focused in large open areas such as the quad would garner much more attention, support and notoriety. Loyola would rather have students protest off to the corners of the student center, which is not a centrally located campus gathering place.

Many social movements of the 1960s and 70s started on college campuses, attracting thousands of people. What if Loyola students wanted to start a large-scale demonstration, one that connected a community of people with similar values?

The Damen Student Center and Terry Student Center simply do not have the capacity to hold a large group of supporters, which is key to a successful movement. With these new guidelines, the university has the power to simply remove protestors outside of these designated zones. If the Loyola and Rogers Park community felt strongly enough about a certain issue, I would want us to stand up for what we believed in not be cordoned off to a designated zone.

These changes are serious attacks on students ability to express themselves. Yet some of the most disturbing restrictions were previously present in the student conduct handbook.

View post:
University shortchanges students on speech policy