Opinion | JMU’s protection of free speech, while promising, could be better – The Breeze

Balancing the freedom of expression with the health and safety of the people has been an issue that's long troubled our nations highest courts. The freedom of speech, and Bill of Rights as a whole, is a symbol of national pride in the U.S. However, we dont practice complete and unadulterated free speech and havent for a long time.

One of the first major Supreme Court cases regarding free speech, Schenck v. United States, saw the court rule in 1919 against the defendants right to spread anti-draft literature, stating that speech inciting clear and present danger isnt protected by the constitutionSince that time, free speech has been increasingly narrowly defined by preceding court decisions.

Today, as corporations and institutions create policies to establish standards of appropriate behavior among employees and students, the question emerges: Do these individuals' rights remain when they enter these environments? More complicated yet is when this question is applied to public universities in receipt of public funding and further still, when the public university in question is the Bill of Rights author James Madisons namesake.

For the past seven years,JMUs maintained a yellow lightstatus by the Foundation of Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE, an organization tasked with assessing the degree at which students rights are being violated on campuses across the country. FIRE ranks schools by their compliance to constitutional standards from red to green light statuses.

Prior to receiving its yellow light status, JMU was one of few universities that boasted a green light status, first achieving the distinction in 2011. Moreover, JMU was listed on FIREsSeven Best Colleges for Free Speech in 2012. However, JMUs enactment of school rules, such as enforcing a screening of all forms of public expression prior to expression, a requirement for mandatory association with a recognized student organization and a limit on the areas in which public expression can be found contributed to its demotion during the 2015-16 school year. School rules with the intent of protecting students from harassment, bullying and obscenity also played a role in FIRE determining JMUs yellow light status.

Ultimately, this begs the question of whether total free speech is desirable on campus, even when considering the crucial role the marketplace of ideas plays in the development of creativity at academic institutions.

Student Defenders is an organization at JMU that actively seeks to prevent the encroachment of students rights during the process of determining appropriate retribution for the violation of university policy. More specifically, Student Defenders stands in as an advocate for students throughout proceedings of an Office of Student Accountability and Restorative Practices (OSARP) or Honors Council case.

Closely associated with FIRE, Student Defenders has been the source of the most prominent movement for the amendment of rules limiting expression at JMU. Gage Waltner, the director of Student Defenders, said the organization has been expanding its communication with officials on campus to secure a spot on the Accountability Control Board, which meets every summer to provide feedback on potential changes to the student handbook. Moreover, he suggested that rectifying even the most trivial infractions or vaguely worded policies is crucial, stressing that overlooking them could lead to a more consequential infringement of students rights.

Considering JMU is a public institution receiving$98 million in state funding, as of 2021, the enforcement of policies that limit the freedom of expression on campus while legally sound could be interpreted as government censorship and prevents the voices of many to go unheard. While the U.S. government doesnt recognize the protection of speech that could endanger another person, JMUs policies take the sentiment a step further by not protecting speech that could be considered harassment or bullying.

The argument of whether or not JMU has a valid claim on the interest of its students mental health is precarious considering the gravity of its consequences. Most college students are adults and therefore dont require the government or university to protect them from the worlds harsh realities. However, a hostile environment isnt conducive to learning and can causelong-lasting psychological damage.

Tim Miller, JMUs vice president for student affairs, is tasked withfostering a constructive environment for students. He and his leadership team suggest that expression and safety arent mutually exclusive and that JMU strives to advance them simultaneously while noting the complexities of assessing the severity of harassment and the various remedies provided by the university.

Health, safety and free speech on a college campus are both vital to student success and growth, just in different ways, Miller said. We are regularly examining ways we can enhance both while being mindful of restrictions and requirements that apply to us as a university and particularly as a public agency.

He went on to mention annual evaluations that the policies outlined in the student handbook endure and further stated that two policies that had been flagged by FIRE are currently under additional review. He also discussed the harassment section of JMUs sexual misconduct policy. Miller argued that this policy allows JMU to satisfy its legal obligations to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,a law prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race or other condition, as well as providing protection against subjection to hostile environments and sexual harrassment.

So long as achieving green-light status requires the abandonment of rules flagged by FIRE, including those hedging against harassment and bullying, complete free speech may not be ideal in a college setting. That being said, reducing the barriers students face in the pursuit of self expression at JMU should be a priority, beginning with the removal of the rules that limit or prevent students especially those without the support of a recognized student organization from speaking their mind.

With compelling arguments and valid interests on both sides of the issue, a compromise must be reached and, in large part, has for the past six years. However, movements to further refine school policy in pursuit of the ideal balance that optimizes creativity and well-being should be welcomed and encouraged. Its an indication of the health and vitality of the community at JMU that its splitting hairs on issues as important as the freedom of expression and its implications at large.

Evan Weaver is a sophomore English major. Contact Evan at weavereh@dukes.jmu.edu.

Excerpt from:
Opinion | JMU's protection of free speech, while promising, could be better - The Breeze