Learn to Trust Students

Courts, legislators, administrators, and David Horowitz are all attacking free speech and free political expression on campus. There is only one voice missing – ours.

By Amy Schiller, Brandeis University

If I were to take a poll today, I imagine most people would agree that the best avenue for students to have a voice on campus affairs and current events is their student newspaper. Granted, these publications are not always the bastions of journalistic integrity and rigorous copy edits to which they aspire, but I doubt that provides sufficient grounds for the Chicago-based U.S. Court of Appeals foir the 7 th Circuit to grant permission to public university administrators to censor college newspapers. A panel of 11 judges, split 7-4, handed down their decision in Hosty v. Carter last Monday, saying that, contrary to the earlier decision by three judges of that court, administrators at public colleges and universities are constitutionally permitted to review and edit the contents of student newspapers.

Good thinking. Administrators are never hostile to student concerns or overly interested in the school’s appearance to alumni and donors, right? Wrong. Administrators certainly have the incentive to curtail the free speech rights of their own students.

Even beyond that cynical objection, the Court’s decision seems almost arbitrary in its wording, lumping college students into the same legal category as high-schoolers based on a highly controversial decision, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier. That decision held that high school journalists were not afforded full First Amendment protection. The basis for granting censorship authority to university administrators rested on, shockingly, the whim of the administrators themselves as to whether or not the newspaper was a “designated public forum” that granted students editorial oversight. How flattering, to think our ability to maturily exercise editorial discretion is at the same level as a fourteen-year old.

Times like these, I like to whip out my WWDHD? Bracelet- you know, What Would David Horowitz Do? Horowitz is the energizer bunny of conservative advocacy, particularly in his ability to travel to as many universities as possible to inform students that their professors are “totalitarian leftists radicals” who conspire to silence conservative voices on campuses. Not to fear, though, because Horowitz has a plan to deal with this dangerous takeover of the academy.

Mere days after the Hosty decision restricted students’ freedom of expression, shackling them to the censorious powers of their leftist radical administrators, I heard Howrotiwz speak at the Heritage Foundation on the subject of academic freedom. Horowitz’ major campaign recently has been his Academic Bill of Rights, which he claims was just endorsed by the American Council on Education in their statement last Tuesday. The Academic Bill of Rights (ABOR) insists that, among other things, “ Academic freedom consists in protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers and students… therefore no political, ideological or religious orthodoxy will be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring or tenure or termination process, or through any other administrative means by the academic institution.” Horowitz has pushed the ABOR to various state legislatures, where the seemingly high-minded language of the original document is expanded to its full thought-police potential.

Ohio’s Senate Bill 24, for instance, demands that “curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social studies shall respect all human knowledge in these areas and provide students with dissenting sources and viewpoints.” Read that again: individual curricula and reading lists in individual courses in the humanities and social sciences shall respect all human knowledge in these areas. In other words, this legislation provides a permission slip for any conservative state legislator who wants to intimidate or harass a specific professor on the basis of his or her syllabus for a specific course. Coincidentally, that happens to be exactly the behavior that Horowitz claims to be crusading against, a stance that he openly admitted to the Heritage interns was a political gambit: “You have to use the language of victimhood…it’s a very politically effective strategy.”

Apparently, the more insidious potential of the ABOR was not lost on ACE, either. Their press release is actually more of a critique of Horowitz than an endorsement, and their main point emphasizes what is most hypocritical, and ultimately the most disempowering aspect of Horowitz’ agenda. ACE doesn’t mention Horowitz by name, but does mention that “these issues [of intellectual pluralism and academic freedom]…captured the attention of the media, political leaders, and those in the academy.” While the ACE did reference the letter of Horowitz’ (potential) law, they removed the spirit, by emphasizing that colleges themselves have sufficient mechanisms to regulate issues of ideological diversity (another word that Horowitz urged young conservatives to co-opt from liberals and distort in their campus campaigns) This sentiment was voiced by Robert C. Andringa, president of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, who said that Horowitz’s legislation was wrong because “it is inappropriate for legislative bodies to get involved in academic freedom issues.”

Though his ostensible goal is to empower young conservatives, Horowitz totally distrusts students to effectively parrot his ideology—oh, excuse me, “stand up to leftist biases.” He spent more of his talk lambasting students for NOT speaking up, or not doing so effectively, than highlighting successful student protests. He gave examples from Tufts and from an unnamed school in Colorado [hmm, maybe this one? – ed] where conservative students failed to respond with sufficient aggression to the offensive radicals in the classroom and at campus events. He followed this up with condescending jokes (“does anyone remember Neville Chamberlain?”) and expressions of continual surprise about how young we were. (Um, what was that advice about knowing your audience? The guy makes his living talking to young people, surely he could do so in a way that made them feel empowered rather than imperiled with him as their only savior.)

My intent is not to bash Horowitz (you can find Campus Progress’s well-researched profile of him here) but to point out that a lot of the discussion about freedom of expression, particularly political expression, on campus goes right over the heads of students. All too often, it’s the students’ voices that matter least, unless those youngsters are viewed as puppets for older conservatives trying to make inroads into the supposed bastions of radical totalitarian extremism known as college.

State legislatures shouldn’t decide what professors can and cannot say while administrators, and federal courts shouldn’t be controlling what students can discuss and debate in what should be their most open and effective forum.

The ACE provides a refreshingly reasonable voice; young activists should get in the fray to prove that students- you know, those people who create the action at universities- can effectively discuss ideas, with plenty of room for all ideological bents.

Note: You can read a full account of the history of the Hosty v. Carter decision here. The student plaintiffs are appealing to the Supreme Court, but this is a case to keep on the radar screen, especially because, if it stands, the decision won’t just censor newspapers, but could have impact on any student-run activity, including films, theater performances, and speakers.

Campus Progress wants to empower students on campuses. We publish your writing, support events that you plan, and support publications that students run (and over which we do not have editorial control in any respect). No matter where people lie on the political spectrum, everyone knows that students and young people are key to generating ideas, debating ideas, criticizing ideas and mobilizing their communities. We’d like to think we have more integrity, as well as a higher cool quotient, so, to quote Jerry Maguire, help us help you.

Illustration: Matt Bors