Silenced Slope of Slienced Speech

Slippery Slope of Silenced Speech
(written October 14th, 2008.)

The right of all American men and women to practice free speech is in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights because it is one of the cornerstones of American democracy and is paramount to all other rights. When student Doug Hann was expelled from attending Brown University, his First Amendment rights were violated. Doug Hann had directed racial epithets towards other Brown University students on multiple occasions, and the Undergraduate Disciplinary Council ruled that Hann be expelled from Brown University for the rest of his life. With the Brown University community punishing Hann for his speech, they start to traverse down a slippery slope of censorship that could lead to further restrictions upon what is deemed as acceptable speech. Hann was expelled due to his speech, and not his behavior as according to Brown University President Vartan Gregorian. There is a large difference between actions and speech, but Brown President Gregorian has failed to see the distinction.
College campuses are one of the few places left for free speech and for people to discuss their ideas freely. With The Undergraduate Disciplinary Council’s expulsion of Hann for his speech, their actions open the door for further restrictions of free speech. Speech that is considered acceptable today may be deemed unacceptable tomorrow. In Brown University’s Codes of Conduct, it is stated: “(The University’s Code of Conduct) [sic] prohibits not speech, but actions… which deals with inappropriate, abusive, threatening or demeaning actions based on race, religion, etc…” These words, “inappropriate,” and “threatening,” are subjective. Those in charge at Brown University may one day deem words or sayings that are socially acceptable today as “inappropriate”. Writer Nat Hentoff explores this further in “Should This Student Have Been Expelled?” where he quotes a letter written by Brown University President Vartan Gregorian and comments: “Gregorian emphasizes that “The Rules do not proscribe words, epithets, or slanders, they proscribe behavior.” Behavior that “shows flagrant disrespect for the well-being of others or is unreasonably disruptive of the University Community.” Consider the over breadth and vagueness of these penalty-bearing provisions. What are the definitions of “harassment,” “inappropriate,” “demeaning,” “flagrant,” “disrespect,” “wellbeing,” “unreasonably”?” These rules are too subjective and allow for the outlawing of a wide variety of words and behaviors.
The difference between speech and behavior has become blurred due to Brown University President Vartan Gregorian’s claim that Hann was expelled due to his actions and not his speech. In writing to the New York Times, Gregorian claimed that he is a steward of free speech and Hann’s expulsion was not a free speech issue. In this letter, “Brown Expulsion Not About Free Speech,” Gregorian wrote: “The point at which speech becomes behavior... is determined by a hearing.” Gregorian also claimed: “Brown University has never expelled anyone for free speech, nor will it ever do so.” These two claims are in direct contradiction of each other. By Gregorian’s own admission, speech is changed into behavior when he (or a committee) feels that it: “Shows flagrant disrespect for the well-being of others.” Hentoff contends that Hann would not have been expelled had: “…he spoken different words while engaging in the same conduct.” If the behavior were truly the issue, then the student would most likely have not been expelled had he spoken different words. Speech and behavior are not interchangeable and there is a demarcation that Gregorian has blatantly ignored in order to appear as someone who believes in free speech.
Brown University and other college campuses across the United States are frontiers of free speech, as well as education. When people like Brown President Vartan Gregorian blatantly disregard the rights granted to all citizens by the First Amendment, they do a great disservice to the University as a whole. Steps like those taken by the Undergraduate Disciplinary Council are the first down a dangerous path of censorship. In order to maintain the integrity of the First Amendment on college campuses, students must be allowed to express their views through speech as long as it does not inflict physical harm upon anyone else.