Governor calls on Utah colleges to ensure free speech rights
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
Colleges and universities occupy a unique position as the “truest marketplace of ideas,” said Utah’s Interim Commissioner of Education Geoff Landward on Friday.
Colleges and universities are places “where the most educated experts in various ideas are able to express those ideas, engage with students, engage with community members, and other institutions and have been held out as the paragon protector of those forums,” Landward said, addressing the Utah Board of Higher Education.
“That responsibility kind of weighs on us all the time. Unfortunately, the complexity of the First Amendment also makes that responsibility very difficult to manage,” he said.
With that in mind, the Utah Board of Higher Education, overseers of Utah’s system of public colleges and universities, adopted a resolution establishing expectations for implementing principles of free expression on campus.
It calls on campuses to maintain institutional neutrality, protect a speaker’s right to free expression at approved events or venues on campus and to provide a process for an institution to publicly address, condemn or prohibit expression or actions that violate the law.”
Landward said the resolution was a companion to an earlier free expression resolution passed in May by the former higher education board. The new board, all appointed by Gov. Spencer Cox, voted unanimously to adopt the new guidance document on Friday.
Cox, House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, and Senate President J. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, spoke in support of the resolution, particularly with respect to institutional neutrality.
The governor said institutional neutrality “may be a little controversial, it should not be. ... This idea that every institution needs to weigh in on every political debate of the day, it’s one of the dumbest things we’ve done over the last 10 or 20 years as a country.”
Addressing Utah’s public college and university presidents, “I mean this with all the love in my heart when I say I do not care what your position is on Israel and Palestine. I do not care what your position is on Roe v. Wade. We do not mean for our institutions to take a position on those things. That’s not the way it was when I went to college. It’s not the way it should be today,” Cox said.
However, Cox said he cares about students being able to take their positions on Israel and Palestine and Roe v Wade, and “I want them to debate those positions. But the minute our institutions say this is the correct idea of the day, then what you have done is, you have sent a message to other students that their ideas are not welcome to your institution. There is no room for debate and we will not allow that to happen. And I am very serious about that.”
Schultz, meanwhile, thanked the higher education board for “leading out on this issue. We’re excited to partner with you in the legislative branch.”
While it is critical to preserve students’ First Amendment rights, it is “also clear that the higher ed institutions themselves must remain neutral. Institutions are a place for students to learn new ideas, develop into leaders and form their own opinions. The role of higher education institutions is to teach our students, not take a stand on the issues of the day, like the governor said. If that’s what the higher ed institutions are gonna do, go run for office. Go into the political space. That’s the place for that,” Schultz said.
Asked if lawmakers would also address the issue during their upcoming general session, Schultz said, “I’m sure we will. I’m sure there will be some sort of memorializing in state statute what was said today. What that looks like, I don’t know.
“We’re going to work together. I’m super excited that we’re not having to address this from a legislative perspective, that we’re able to work collaboratively with higher education. I think we get better outcomes and better buy-in doing that,” Schultz said.
The board’s action comes as free speech on campuses across the country is being scrutinized by policymakers, donors and even employers.
Closer to home, the University of Utah has recently been tested as competing student organizations — Mecha and Young Americans for Freedom— recently demonstrated on opposite sides of the Israeli-Hamas war and transgender rights.
Related
Earlier this week, seven student protesters who disrupted the Young Americans for Freedom’s watch party at Marriott Library on Nov. 1 were cited by University of Utah police.
The protesters, all enrolled university students, face possible Class B misdemeanor charges for interfering with a peace officer, disrupting operation of a school and disorderly conduct. Any academic discipline and accountability will be managed by the Dean of Students Office, according to a statement from the university.
According to the statement, the citations stemmed from the individuals’ conduct at the event hosted by the Young Americans for Freedom chapter to screen the documentary, “Damaged: The Transing of America’s Kids,” produced by the Daily Caller.
University police halted the event over safety concerns. “The event came to an unexpected halt as campus police enforced the hecklers’ veto, compelling us to shut it down,” said YAF University of Utah chapter president Lucy Atwood.
This past week, the organization that Atwood said champions “traditional family values and conservatism,” conducted another watch party of the film “Damaged” and on Thursday night, hosted a talk by one of the documentary’s subjects, Chloe Cole.
Cole, 19, is an activist from California who supports state bans of sex reassignment surgeries and hormone therapies for minors. The event was peacefully conducted amid a large police presence.
Cole appeared before a largely supportive audience in the U. Languages and Communication Building, although her viewpoint was challenged by some attendees during the event’s question-and-answer period. Meanwhile, students picketed outside the building in support of transgender rights and free speech.
Cole, who testified at the Utah Legislature earlier this year as it considered SB16, which bans sex reassignment surgeries and hormone therapies for minors, said the “so-called doctors” that treated her starting at age 13 abused her and her parents.
“My mom’s and dad’s rights as parents were violated. They were lied to. They were emotionally manipulated in thinking that this was life or death for their child. The doctors told them that they had two choices for me, transition or suicide. They chose the only solution that they were given for me because they loved me and they wanted me to live. So, halfway through my eighth grade year at 13 years old, I was started on my very first intervention which was Lupron to block my puberty,” Cole said.
After undergoing a double mastectomy, Cole said she realized at age 16 that transitioning was a mistake but she found no support from health care providers or others who had earlier helped her and her family navigate reassignment surgery or care.
One student, Jordan Langford, questioned why Cole’s experiences should weigh against people who are seeking sex reassignment surgeries and therapies.
“From the studies that were performed, it’s about a 99% non-regret rate, which, for the record, is higher than most life-saving surgeries and knee replacements and mobility replacements. By and large. people do not regret these surgeries,” he said, adding, “Why should we believe that your case is everybody’s case?”
Cole questioned the reliability of the research, noting she and other “detransitioners” she knows have not been included in such research.
“When was health care about happiness? Cole responded.
“Health care should be about the quality of life of the patient. Regardless of how you look at it whether these patients say they’re happier or not, their overall health decreases greatly.” Cole said.
The resolution also calls on Utah’s public colleges and universities to establish a program designed to educate new students about the institution’s role as the marketplace of ideas such as what constitutes protected speech; when the institution may intervene in speech, such as direct threats, violence, illegal harassment or discrimination and how to appropriately express viewpoints through events, such as protests, parades or other events.
