News
Briefly
Calendar of Events
Commentary
Opinions
Sports
Diversions
World News
Classifieds
Login
Letter Submission
Search
Archive
Publishing Policy
Mail Subscriptions
St. Cloud State University
College Publisher
Home
>
News
Free speech under debate
Saigo's advisor explains campus rights, regulations
By Joe Palmersheim
Published:
Monday, January 31, 2005
In an age of tolerance and diversity, the line between First Amendment rights and respecting others can become blurry.
So, it is no surprise that this issue is a hotbed for discussion in many educational environments such as college campuses across the nation. SCSU is no exception.
In light of recent debates stemming from anti-Semitism, age-discrimination and homophobia, special advisor to SCSU President Roy Saigo, Anne Zemek de Dominguez, spoke Thursday at the Atwood Theatre in a discussion titled "Free Speech and Civility on Campus."
She touched bases on issues ranging from hate-speech to first amendment defenses and the role of public figures such as Saigo in promoting tolerance and freedom on campus. Many of these issues directly affect the student body.
Zemek de Dominguez works directly for President Saigo, and in that position she sees first-hand complaints that range from petty to serious.
"You would not believe -- or maybe you would -- the things that people come and ask him to do," she said. "They ask him to come to Atwood to take away material that offends some of them. They ask the president to do a lot of things, and they don't really understand the role of the president. He represents the institution to the public-- it's a public institution. He really ought not to favor one particular group over another."
Academic freedom, which allows a professor to teach ideas free from the fear of losing their job, is not a right that is guaranteed under the Constitution.
The other half of this idea is the concept of student freedom, which is the right to dissent within the classroom. While that right is given, a student is still expected to learn the content of the course.
Under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Zemek de Dominguez said that students have five freedoms from discrimination including employment, housing, public accommodation, public services and education.
"It is the public policy of the state to keep people secure from discrimination in those five areas on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, nation origin, sexual orientation and disabilities," she said.
However, she noted an apparent double-standard in the wording of some of these laws.
For example, employers cannot refuse to hire someone because they are homosexual. But, in Para. 363A. 27 in the same law, it states that "nothing in this chapter shall be meant to condone or authorize or permit the promotion of homosexuality."
Regarding the rights of students to gather in protest, the University has designated areas on campus in which people can gather to express their opinions.
"Whether you can control speech or regulate it depends on the type of property," Zemek de Dominguez said. "Government property has usually been characterized as three kinds: traditional public forum, designated public forum, and non-public forum."
This relates to the university campus in the sense that the buildings on campus are not public forums. However, there are places on campus that are public forums.
"The university may open up areas to the public," she said. "The university may also restrict areas for speech; that would be (an area) like the president's office. That is not where you would have a lively debate."
The designated public forums that people can protest or speak on without any permission are limited to the pedestrian malls around Stewart, Atwood and Halenbeck's plaza.
Student rights extend also to campus media outlets such as the student newspaper.
"MnSCU has a policy about student newspaper that we have to adhere to," she said. "Student policy provides that you can't fire a manager or editor because you don't like a story or the public doesn't like a story."
With that freedom, however, she said comes certain responsibility.
"SCSU does not have editorial control over the University Chronicle," Zemek de Dominguez said. "That's a legal fact. Because SCSU does not have control over the Chronicle, it is not liable as a matter of law for any defamation that may come out of a newspaper."
When asked what she thought was the greatest threat to free speech on campus and in general, Zemek de Dominguez expressed her sentiments.
"Speaking for myself, and not for the University," Zemek de Dominguez said. "I believe it's the current political situation and our president."
Forum:
No comments have been posted for this story.
Post a comment
