![]() |
| Office of the Chancellor / Public Affairs |
Wednesday, August 13, 2003
|
Chronicle of Higher Education 8-13-03 Letter to Colleges From Education Department Says Anti-Harassment Rules
Should Respect Free Speech |
|
| Colleges may not violate the U.S. Constitution's free-speech guarantees in an effort to bar harassment on their campuses, according to a letter sent last week by the Education Department to colleges and universities across the country. The letter states that the department's regulations "do not require or prescribe speech, conduct, or harassment codes that impair the exercise of rights protected under the First Amendment." Department officials say the document only clarifies existing policy and does not set new policy. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a national advocacy group for free speech, was one of the groups that had asked the Education Department to clarify the issue. The group's leaders see the government's memorandum as a victory in the foundation's campaign to rid colleges of what it sees as overly restrictive speech codes. The group posted a copy of the letter on its Web site this week. "We really do think that this is going to make a big difference in the fight against speech codes," said Greg Lukianoff, director of legal and public advocacy for FIRE. He said that several colleges had argued that their anti-harassment policies -- which FIRE contends violate free-speech rights -- are required to satisfy federal law protecting students from harassment. According to the letter, which was sent by the department's Office for Civil Rights, "Some colleges and universities have interpreted OCR's prohibition of 'harassment' as encompassing all offensive speech regarding sex, disability, race, or other classifications. Harassment, however, to be prohibited by the statutes within OCR's jurisdiction, must include something beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols, or thoughts that some person finds offensive." That policy is nothing new, said Susan Aspey, the department's deputy press secretary. "There is no conflict between the civil-rights laws that this office enforces and the civil liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment," she said. "There's no new information contained in this letter -- it's simply a reiteration of what OCR does or does not require." Robert O'Neil, founding director of the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression and a professor of law at the University of Virginia, said that the policy stated in the letter should come as no surprise to most college officials. "I don't see it as a policy shift or a major breakthrough -- it's incrementally helpful," he said. "I don't think it is likely to be seen as a source of change."
|
|
|
These news clips are provided by the Public Affairs Department of The California State University. They are intended for the internal use of The California State University system and should not be redistributed. Questions and submissions may be sent to publicaffairs@calstate.edu. |
|