A public university should allow us to exercise our constitutional rights

I’m of the opinion that universities are meant to be places of growth and discovery, somewhere that people can learn about ideas and beliefs that they’ve never been exposed to before. The ability to learn about new ideologies and philosophies in a conducive environment helps everyone, as young people grow and become more informed.

Unfortunately, many colleges and universities across the country do not seem to see themselves as bastions of expression and debate, but rather as safe spaces that must restrict the freedoms of its students in the name of ‘safety.’

In 2018, a report published by FIRE found that 89.7 percent of American colleges have policies that restrict the freedom of expression of their students and faculty. 

Additionally, nearly 800,000 college students attend a college that has free speech policies, through which the administration can restrict where their student body is allowed to exercise their 1st Amendment rights on campus. Only nine percent of the 42 schools researched for the report did not have any policies or rules that violated their students’ freedom of speech.

These free speech zones began popping up on college campuses during the 1990s and have only served to stifle ideological growth and self-expression. Tens of thousands of college students across the country sign over their 1st Amendment rights the moment they enroll in these universities, many without realizing it. 

We may see this issue as far-off and inconsequential to us, but North Dakota State University is no different than these other universities. While our university is not nearly as bad as some others when it comes to restricting the self-expression of its students, NDSU’s policies still contain language that allows the administration to hamper our 1st Amendment rights.

For instance, Section 194, subsection 9.1 of the NDSU Policy Manual reads: “While the campus must be open to the free exchange of ideas, the University may limit the time, place and manner of protests, rallies, and demonstrations.” 

Additionally, subsection 9.4 states: “any protest, rally, or demonstration on NDSU campus must be registered with the Director of the Memorial Union and the university police prior to the event. Whenever possible, at least 24 hours lead time will be given.”

This language, in my opinion, is a clear restriction on the 1st Amendment rights of NDSU students. This is a land-grant university, public land funded with taxpayer dollars. Why should a public institution built on land funded through tax money be able to restrict our ability to speak and assemble freely? 

Obviously a violent and potentially dangerous gathering is not covered under the right to peaceably assemble, but what about the majority of people that simply want to exercise their 1st Amendment right freely and peaceably? 

Having to get permission from the administration and the police of a public university just to peaceably assemble seems to me to be a violation of the 1st Amendment. 

If you think that these restrictions on the free expression of college students aren’t a big deal, that I’m making a mountain out of the proverbial molehill, think again. Students at American universities have been punished by their administrations for exercising their freedom of speech before. 

Just last week, Santa Ana College enacted reforms in its policies after a nearly year-long legal battle with three former students.

These students had their freedom of speech and peaceable assembly violated last November by the Santa Ana College administration and University Police when a free-speech-ball used by the group to promote and express free speech was shut down by the university due to some offensive symbols and words that were written on it by participants.

The students were charged with violating the college’s Standards of Student Conduct; which banned vulgarity, obscene expressions, and hate speech.

These students had to take their own university, a place thought of as a center for learning and expression, to court for nearly a year before Santa Ana College reformed their policies in line with the constitution. 

This public college is just one of many across the United States that routinely censors its own students in the name of protecting them from vague menaces like “hate” and “obscenity”.

What kind of place is a university supposed to be if it restricts the ability of young adults to express their ideas? How can we as people progress intellectually if certain beliefs and thoughts are banned because a handful of administrators or bureaucrats label them too “hateful” or “obscene” for college students? 

Humans, especially young adults, should be exposed to any and all ideologies available so that we can use our logic to determine which ideas are worth believing in. How can we learn about the dangers of bigotry, communism, fascism, and other toxic beliefs if our centers of scholarship do not adequately let us freely speak and peaceably assemble?

We gain our knowledge through debate, discussion, and the free exchange of ideas, so the oppression of our ability to do so by any public college is not only illegal under the 1st Amendment, but it is also a betrayal of the purpose of a university itself. Anyone who would sacrifice their freedoms, especially one as important as the freedom of speech, for even a little bit of temporary security deserve neither.