Since Hamas’s attack on Israel last October and the subsequent war in Gaza, college campuses across the country have been embroiled in a series of pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel protests. This spring, more than 100 of those protests turned into encampments. At several universities, tent encampments turned into violence and vandalism, with occasional clashes with police.
As the academic year draws to a close, scenes of chaos at universities including Columbia University and UCLA are making national headlines. The situation became more dire when college administrators called on law enforcement to disperse the encampments and several schools canceled major commencement ceremonies.
In the aftermath of these protests, many sympathetic commentators insisted that university presidents’ responses to pro-Palestinian camps were direct censorship.
By Megan Iorio, Senior Counsel, Electronic Privacy Information Center There is a gulf between the ideals of the First Amendment and the actual practice of free speech, and the crackdown on the encampments illustrates that. Science and Technology Policy Press in May. “The freedom of individuals to assemble, associate, and express opinions opposed to those in power is fundamental to the concept of free speech, but this discussion treats these rights as subject to the right of university administrators to enforce rules governing the use of campus space.”
The situation is not as simple as Iorio’s framework. While university administrators have violated students’ rights to peaceful protest (e.g., at several public universities in Texas), private and public universities generally have the authority to ban tent encampments.
“While campus encampments are an act of expression — and no one doubts that protesters are here to send a message — that’s not the end of the story,” wrote Jesse Appleby of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. “Even in spaces where the right to protest is greatest—public sidewalks, parks, and open outdoor areas on public campuses—governments, including public universities, can still impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on when, where, and how people can protest. People How to protest.
While public universities are bound by the First Amendment and private universities committed to broad free speech can face charges of breach of contract if they punish students for their speech, universities are almost never required to allow tent camps to continue.
“Overnight camps can create a public safety risk and overburden campus security. They may prevent other groups on campus from using the space for an extended period of time,” Appleby explained. “They may impede access to campus facilities or disrupt classes and other daily activities. All of these are legitimate reasons for universities to restrict camps.”
It is crucial, however, that such a policy be implemented neutrally. If a university allows a tent camp to be set up to protest an issue but suppresses pro-Palestinian issues, it could amount to illegal viewpoint discrimination.
Just because universities have the legal right to ban tent encampments doesn’t mean bringing in police is always a good idea. While some camps, such as those at Columbia University and UCLA, became destructive (at UCLA, largely thanks to counter-protesters), many universities facing pro-Palestinian camps did find themselves in dire straits.
If the tent encampment continues, administrators could encourage disgruntled students in the future to effectively occupy a small area of campus in protest, and could get the university president hauled before Congress. If they respond too harshly to peaceful civil disobedience, administrators risk appearing cruel and forcing angry students to try more destructive forms of protest, such as occupying buildings.
What should universities learn from a year of raucous acts of civil disobedience? First, a formal policy of institutional neutrality, while far from perfect, can set a firm precedent that universities will not take sides in contemporary political debates and therefore will not bow to student pressure.
There are some signs that universities are looking to move in this direction. In May, for example, Harvard University announced it would take a formal stance of institutional neutrality. A Harvard Crimson The survey found that more than 70% of faculty in the university’s College of Arts and Sciences support this policy.
Many universities have issued statements in response to controversial current events in recent years. This latest controversy may give them the push they need to stop taking sides unnecessarily.
This article originally appeared in the print edition under the headline “Universities should remain content neutral during campus protests.”
