Stewards of the Visual Exposition
UNC gets Lessons in Controversy
Publisher's note: The author of this post is Kari Travis, who is an Associate Editor for the Carolina Journal, John Hood Publisher.
This year, lawmakers passed a controversial law protecting campus speech. Now it's up to the UNC Board of Governors to move things forward.
What happened
On July 31, House Bill 527, Restore/Preserve Campus Free Speech, became state law without Gov. Roy Cooper's signature.
North Carolina is one of five states to pass such legislation. Colorado, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia have similar laws.
California, Illinois, Michigan, Texas, and Wisconsin are also considering free speech legislation.
H.B. 527 boosts protections for the First Amendment, directing the UNC Board of Governors to develop a systemwide speech policy. The board will form a Committee on Free Expression to enforce the policy.
What the policy does
What people think about it
The law isn't popular among some Democratic lawmakers who believe it will chill speech - not protect it.
Earlier this year, UNC President Margaret Spellings told Carolina Journal speech protections already were in place across the system. At the time, UNC was concerned about a part of the bill that created a cause of action for lawsuits. That provision was later removed.
Free speech protections are never a bad thing, said board member Rob Bryan, a former representative in the North Carolina House.
"We're not helping our kids if they need a safe zone because they don't like hearing a different opinion," he told CJ. "I don't think that's good for the university mission."
Bryan is a UNC Chapel Hill alumnus. He began his education as a Democrat and graduated a conservative - unusual by any standard, he said.
"I told one of the [university] administrators, 'If you go to Chapel Hill and you're a conservative, your views are well challenged. You have heard the other side of things. You've had to debate them.'"
UNC should be careful to present all views, he said.
"All of these kids are really smart, whether conservative, liberal, libertarian - they're all bright kids. But I'm just afraid that the kids who come in on the liberal side are just ... fed information that reinforces their pre-existing views, and they couldn't go articulate conservative arguments that are held by very rational people."
Read more on the subject here.
Uncertainty surrounds the UNC School of Law's Center for Civil Rights. Should it be allowed to file lawsuits against government agencies? The Board of Governors says no. UNC administrators, faculty, and students say yes.
What happened
On Aug. 1, a Board of Governor's education policy committee voted to block the Center for Civil Rights from filing some lawsuits. The proposal will go before the full board in September.
Board member Steve Long introduced the policy in March. It didn't go over well with CCR supporters. Dozens of students, faculty, and administrators turned out at a public hearing in May.
Tuesday's discussion got heated, to say the least.
CCR Executive Director Ted Shaw called Long a "moving assassin."
Long, a conservative, wants to close the center because of its liberal leanings, Shaw said.
"It's an ideological hit directed at the Center for Civil Rights. It can be denied, but I think if we're candid, everybody knows why we're here, and what the politics are."
That's just not true, Long told CJ.
"It was a highly inappropriate comment. It was shameful," he said.
The litigation ban has always been about preventing an academic center from suing the government, Long added.
"It gets back to the point that we're a university, not a law firm," he said.
What the policy does
What people think about it
The center is essential to UNC's mission, center staffers and supporters say.
If the board passes the proposal, the university name will be tarnished among national peers, said UNC Chapel Hill Chancellor Carol Folt.
"I have received hundreds of letters in support of the center - 375 in a single day," Folt wrote in a letter to the board. "I am concerned that eliminating or even weakening the Law School's ability to train the next generation of civil rights lawyers will reflect poorly on our university and the school, as well as the university system and our state."
The CCR could be turned into a legal clinic, but that would take a lot of time and money, she added.
"The Law School has successful clinical programs in several other areas - we do not currently have the funding, staff, or space this effort would require," she said, outlining alternatives for the center.
UNC has plenty of clinics in place - many of which teach civil rights law, Long said.
Anna Nelson, chair of the education policy committee, said the board shouldn't be involved in the first place.
"I would rather we weren't having this conversation at the Board of Governors. Ideally, matters such as this should be handled at the campus level," she said.
"For me, regardless of which side you stand on, there is something larger at stake. The university itself. This proposal poses a reputational risk to the university, which transcends the specific circumstances here."
Read more on the subject here.
Go Back
This year, lawmakers passed a controversial law protecting campus speech. Now it's up to the UNC Board of Governors to move things forward.
What happened
On July 31, House Bill 527, Restore/Preserve Campus Free Speech, became state law without Gov. Roy Cooper's signature.
North Carolina is one of five states to pass such legislation. Colorado, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia have similar laws.
California, Illinois, Michigan, Texas, and Wisconsin are also considering free speech legislation.
H.B. 527 boosts protections for the First Amendment, directing the UNC Board of Governors to develop a systemwide speech policy. The board will form a Committee on Free Expression to enforce the policy.
What the policy does
- Universities cannot shield students from any idea, no matter how offensive.
- Universities cannot take official stances on public policy issues.
- Universities cannot block a speaker from coming to campus.
- Protesters cannot use violence or rowdy behavior to disrupt an event and cannot infringe upon the rights of others.
- Students who violate rules of expressive speech and conduct will receive disciplinary action from the university.
What people think about it
The law isn't popular among some Democratic lawmakers who believe it will chill speech - not protect it.
Earlier this year, UNC President Margaret Spellings told Carolina Journal speech protections already were in place across the system. At the time, UNC was concerned about a part of the bill that created a cause of action for lawsuits. That provision was later removed.
Free speech protections are never a bad thing, said board member Rob Bryan, a former representative in the North Carolina House.
"We're not helping our kids if they need a safe zone because they don't like hearing a different opinion," he told CJ. "I don't think that's good for the university mission."
Bryan is a UNC Chapel Hill alumnus. He began his education as a Democrat and graduated a conservative - unusual by any standard, he said.
"I told one of the [university] administrators, 'If you go to Chapel Hill and you're a conservative, your views are well challenged. You have heard the other side of things. You've had to debate them.'"
UNC should be careful to present all views, he said.
"All of these kids are really smart, whether conservative, liberal, libertarian - they're all bright kids. But I'm just afraid that the kids who come in on the liberal side are just ... fed information that reinforces their pre-existing views, and they couldn't go articulate conservative arguments that are held by very rational people."
Read more on the subject here.
Uncertainty surrounds the UNC School of Law's Center for Civil Rights. Should it be allowed to file lawsuits against government agencies? The Board of Governors says no. UNC administrators, faculty, and students say yes.
What happened
On Aug. 1, a Board of Governor's education policy committee voted to block the Center for Civil Rights from filing some lawsuits. The proposal will go before the full board in September.
Board member Steve Long introduced the policy in March. It didn't go over well with CCR supporters. Dozens of students, faculty, and administrators turned out at a public hearing in May.
Tuesday's discussion got heated, to say the least.
CCR Executive Director Ted Shaw called Long a "moving assassin."
Long, a conservative, wants to close the center because of its liberal leanings, Shaw said.
"It's an ideological hit directed at the Center for Civil Rights. It can be denied, but I think if we're candid, everybody knows why we're here, and what the politics are."
That's just not true, Long told CJ.
"It was a highly inappropriate comment. It was shameful," he said.
The litigation ban has always been about preventing an academic center from suing the government, Long added.
"It gets back to the point that we're a university, not a law firm," he said.
What the policy does
- Prevents academic centers from filing complaints, motions, lawsuits, or any other legal pleading.
- Blocks academic centers from serving as legal counsel - directly or indirectly.
- Excludes law school clinics - approved by the American Bar Association - from the policy's jurisdiction.
What people think about it
The center is essential to UNC's mission, center staffers and supporters say.
If the board passes the proposal, the university name will be tarnished among national peers, said UNC Chapel Hill Chancellor Carol Folt.
"I have received hundreds of letters in support of the center - 375 in a single day," Folt wrote in a letter to the board. "I am concerned that eliminating or even weakening the Law School's ability to train the next generation of civil rights lawyers will reflect poorly on our university and the school, as well as the university system and our state."
The CCR could be turned into a legal clinic, but that would take a lot of time and money, she added.
"The Law School has successful clinical programs in several other areas - we do not currently have the funding, staff, or space this effort would require," she said, outlining alternatives for the center.
UNC has plenty of clinics in place - many of which teach civil rights law, Long said.
Anna Nelson, chair of the education policy committee, said the board shouldn't be involved in the first place.
"I would rather we weren't having this conversation at the Board of Governors. Ideally, matters such as this should be handled at the campus level," she said.
"For me, regardless of which side you stand on, there is something larger at stake. The university itself. This proposal poses a reputational risk to the university, which transcends the specific circumstances here."
Read more on the subject here.
Home
Contact
About
Service Rates
Privacy Policy
Follow on Facebook
Subscribe to Newsletters
Rss Feed
Keywords
Eastern NC Now & ENC NOW © Copyright 1998-2024 All Rights Reserved.
