The author reflects on their experiences as a student at Harvard Law School during a time of intense campus protests during the early 1990s. They recount how the protests, initially centered around issues of diversity, gradually escalated into more aggressive and unruly displays of activism. Witnessing the clashes between different student groups and being personally targeted for their anti-abortion views led the author to dedicate their career to defending free speech. They emphasize the importance of allowing for dissenting voices in academic settings and express concern for the impact of campus culture on the boundaries of debate.
The author delves into the complexities of campus culture when it comes to protests, distinguishing between free speech, civil disobedience, and lawlessness. They argue that universities should prioritize protecting free speech, respecting civil disobedience, and upholding the rule of law. This means ensuring that all members of the campus community have equal access to resources and facilities, regardless of their ideological affiliations. The author acknowledges the challenges in setting boundaries for protests while maintaining a conducive academic environment.
The author highlights the importance of distinguishing between lawful protests, civil disobedience, and outright lawlessness on campus. They stress the need for reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions to ensure that all members of the community can coexist peacefully. They caution against actions that violate the rights of others, such as occupying public spaces indefinitely or engaging in threatening behavior. The author argues that unchecked lawlessness leads to chaos and injustice, impeding the ability of students to learn and educators to teach effectively.
The author recounts instances of university complicity in enabling disruptive protests, citing examples where administrators and faculty members either supported or turned a blind eye to unlawful behavior by students. They emphasize the importance of universities maintaining institutional neutrality and providing a forum for speech without taking sides in public disputes. The author applauds universities that enforce rules against violence and ensure that protests remain peaceful and lawful, such as Vanderbilt University’s response to a recent protest incident.
The author contrasts universities that uphold principles of neutrality and enforce rules against unlawful behavior with those that either capitulate to chaos or take draconian measures to suppress dissent. They criticize schools that preemptively ban certain viewpoints or use excessive force against protesters, arguing that such actions undermine the educational experience for students. The author calls for a reset during the summer break, urging universities to reaffirm their commitment to protecting free speech, peaceful civil disobedience, and the rule of law on campus.
In conclusion, the author stresses the need for universities to navigate the complexities of campus protests by ensuring a balance between free speech, civil disobedience, and maintaining order on campus. They advocate for institutional neutrality, equal access to resources, and protections against unlawful behavior. By upholding these principles, universities can create a conducive environment for dialogue and learning while respecting the rights and safety of all members of the campus community.
