Free speech? Not at PSU, group says |

Free speech? Not at PSU, group says

Deb Erdley

Be careful what you say on campus.

A Philadelphia-based foundation that monitors free speech issues at colleges across the country claims that more than half of 400 plus colleges and universities it surveyed this year have adopted restrictive codes that violate First Amendment guarantees to free speech.

Penn State’s 2014 policy moved it to the top of the list, according to FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

FIRE singled out the state’s flagship land grant school as its national “Speech Code” school of the month in December for a policy it deemed among the most egregious in the nation.

Penn State, which reviewed policies involving sexual misconduct following the Jerry Sandusky scandal, revised its sexual harassment policy and expanded it to include “verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is unwanted, inappropriate, or unconsented to.”

FIRE officials said the language is so encompassing that a single off-color joke or comment could rise to the level of sexual harassment if anyone finds it inappropriate.

A Penn State spokesman said the school works to balance free speech rights with individual protections.

“Penn State is committed to both freedom of expression and the protection of our students and employees from harassment and intimidation. We firmly believe that our policies properly promote and protect both of these interests, which are at the core of the University’s mission,” Penn State spokesman Riedar Jensen said in an email.

Bruce Antkowiak, a law professor at St. Vincent College in Latrobe, said debates about the limits of free speech date to the enactment of the First Amendment.

“There is a long line of cases about when speech trends from being speech to being akin to walking up and slapping someone in the face. …There has never been a bright line. This has always been something that has adjusted itself to the passions of the moment,” Antkowiak said. He said the notion that words can be sexual harassment has been part of the law for some time.

FIRE officials said Penn State’s sexual harassment policy mirrors many adopted by colleges and universities in the wake of a 2013 agreement the University of Montana entered into with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. The agreement dubbed a “blueprint for colleges and universities throughout the country to protect students from sexual harassment and assault” included speech in its definition of sexual misconduct.

The Montana agreement, hammered out as scores of schools battled ongoing civil rights investigations for alleged violations of federal law in their handling of sexual violence or harassment complaints, spurred many to review their policies.

Samantha Harris, director of policy research at FIRE, said her agency is advising students on various options for attacking policies deemed overly restrictive of free speech rights.

“The courts are one place where students at public universities can challenge them,” Harris said, conceding that she knows of no pending legal challenges.

Other Pennsylvania schools FIRE ranked as having overly restrictive policies on free speech included California, Cheyney, East Stroudsburg, Indiana and West Chester universities and Franklin & Marshall College.

Debra Erdley is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-320-7996 or [email protected]

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.