Alexandra Tempus
University of Wisconsin-Madison senior Laurel Noack protests at the campus speech by pro-gun pundit Katie Pavlich.
Facing down an effort by state lawmakers to severely penalize students who protest controversial speakers on campus, the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents held firm and declared that fidelity to the right to dissent requires a more nuanced approach.
Just kidding.
In fact, the UW Regents completely caved to the wishes of legislative Republicans, passing a policy Friday that calls for the expulsion of students who disrupt speakers.
This same remedy was sought in a controversial bill that passed the state assembly in June.
UW System President Ray Cross, in a statement, said the new policy was “based upon the Board’s previous actions, what other states have done, the Assembly bill, and our own Administrative Rules.”
The bill, coauthored by conservative Republican state Representative Jesse Kremer, originally called for expulsion for students who violate the policy twice. But when the bill was amended to get rid of language that even Kremer admitted was unconstitutional (barring speech deemed “abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, obscene, unreasonably loud”), it was toughened to require expulsion for a three-time offender.
Kremer’s bill was based in large part on model language drafted by the Goldwater Institute, an Arizona-based conservative think tank whose funders have included the Bradley, Walton, and Koch foundations. The Goldwater model calls on campus officials to develop “a range of disciplinary sanctions for anyone under the jurisdiction of the institution who interferes with the free expression of others.”
The policy just passed by the Wisconsin Regents calls on the University of Wisconsin to enshrine “suspension as the sanction for students who have been twice found responsible and expulsion as the sanction for students who have been thrice found responsible for disrupting the expressive rights of others.” The Regents said the new policy would not go into effect until the university system’s rule code had been updated through the normal administrative process.
Only one Regent, state School Superintendent Tony Evers, voted against the new policy. Evers is one of only two members of the 16-member board not appointed by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. (Evers is running as a Democrat against Walker in the 2018 elections.)
In other words, a group of Republican appointees passed a policy identical to that pushed by legislative Republicans. Indeed, Regents President John Robert Behling told the board the new policy showed a “responsiveness to what’s going on in the capitol, which helps build relationships.”
In other words, a group of Republican appointees passed a policy identical to that pushed by legislative Republicans.
Opponents of the new policy note that it is unnecessary. Existing rules governing student conduct already allow for punishing students for disruption. Opponents also fear the new policy will be used as a cudgel to suppress expressions of dissident, like booing and hissing, that should fall within the parameters of acceptable speech.
“I believe this policy will chill and suppress free speech,” Evers argued, noting that the university already has relevant policies. “Rapport is important, but it’s more important that our students are free to speak.”
The policy also drew blowback from the UW System’s flagship university in Madison. “The mandatory sanctions set out by the policy unnecessarily take away the discretion of the campus to impose sanctions appropriate to a student’s conduct in a given situation,” UW-Madison said in a statement.
Huddled in the cold rain outside the locked doors of a campus building Tuesday night, University of Wisconsin-Madison students protested an invited speaker, conservative pro-gun pundit Katie Pavlich.
It was the first such demonstration since the University System Board of Regents approved a policy that would require suspending students who twice disrupt campus speakers and expelling students those who disrupt three times. Though the policy is not yet in effect, the group opted to stay outside the building, packing up before the event began.
“We need to be thinking really carefully about how we disrupt speech in the future, maybe saving it for speakers that are Nazi sympathizers or are really, really racist,” said protest organizer Kat Kerwin, a UW student who serves as chair of the Associated Students of Madison’s Legislative Affairs Committee.
“We need to be thinking really carefully about how we disrupt speech in the future."
It was a small gathering of about two dozen students, some holding signs that read “Disarm Hate.” Some, including Kerwin, waved sex toys in the air as part of the anti-gun “Cocks Not Glocks” campaign that began in Texas, where it is legal to carry guns on campus but not legal to openly brandish dildos.
At one point, a counter-protester stood in front of the group gathered and shouted, “Cocks and glocks!” Jordan Madden, a UW student and a representative on the Associated Students of Madison’s Student Services Finance Committee shouted back, “Does that count as a disruption?”
A UW senior at the protest, Augie McGinnity-Wake, said the broad definition of “disruption” in the new policy put students at risk. “It leaves very ambiguous what disruption actually means,” noted McGinnity-Wake, a former ASM student representative and former chair of UW-Madison’s College Democrats chapter.
“Can you get suspended if you hold up a sign in silent protest at a speech?” he asked. “Can you get suspended if you stand up in silent protest? Can you get suspended if you just walk out of the speech because you just don’t want to hear it?”
Alexandra Tempus
Shaadie Ali, University of Wisconsin-Madison senior and ACLU of Wisconsin board member, watched over the protest as one of several legal observers present.
Hours before the Pavlich event, the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin condemned the policy, vowing to defend students “whose rights are violated by its enforcement.”
“Instead of protecting free expression, this new policy will have the opposite effect—threatening the First Amendment rights of students and suppressing constitutionally-protected speech,” said Chris Ott, the ACLU of Wisconsin executive director in a statement. “Giving controversial figures the right to speak—which the ACLU supports—does not mean denying students the right to protest them.”
ACLU of Wisconsin Legal Observers stood watch over the protest scene Tuesday as police officers and a few counter-protesters and members of conservative media dropped by.
Though protesters did not attempt to force their way inside, police officers appeared at the building’s main entrance, turning away anyone without a ticket to the public event, saying it was sold out. Others were directed to a more discreet side door with no guard, where they entered the building to stand in line.
Abby Streu, chair of event sponsor Young Americans for Freedom’s UW-Madison chapter, introduced speaker Pavlich, saying they would not “tolerate” disruption. Before beginning her talk titled, “Trigger Warning: The Second Amendment and Self-Defense,” Pavlich expressed gratitude to the police officers at the event.
“As we experienced with this event, as many
Alexandra Tempus
Police officers monitored the main entrance to building where Pavlich was speaking.
conservatives speakers attempting to speak on campus experience, free speech isn’t free at our nation’s public universities,” she said.
Pavlich’s talk proceeded without audience disruption. Despite police claims that the event was “sold out,” there were thirteen empty seats in the lecture hall.
Questions emailed to the Board of Regents about the implementation and enforcement of the free speech policy were unanswered as of this publication.
Kerwin said she was unsure what recourse the student body had to influence the policy prior to adoption but is exploring options. Meanwhile she plans to offer trainings on how to navigate the issue through the ASM Legislative Affairs Committee she chairs.
“The trainings would seek to inform students about how far they could push the boundaries of the freedom of speech resolution without getting into trouble,” Kerwin said. “It’s gonna be about how can we push and how far can we protest and which change can we drive without putting our education at risk.”
Student Madden, who also organizes with the Student Coalition for Progress and serves as president of the Accessible Reproductive Health Care Initiative on campus, said he’s had several meetings with the University of Wisconsin legal team in his capacity as a student representative.
They’ve discussed, he said, “What actions can feasibly be taken by students but would also not compromise the future of the student.”
Bill Lueders is managing editor for The Progressive. Alexandra Tempus is associate editor for The Progressive.