lawyer explains how UMBC's "Intolerance" policy is illegal

Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:12:52 -0400

https://baltimorebarristers.com/2016/08/17/august-16-2016-show-campus-censorship-with-ari-cohen-of-fire/

The policy in question:

"University Police may be able to file criminal charges against the perpetrator of an act of intolerance if it is directed toward a specific person because of his/her race, color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or national origin. Actions directed toward a specific individual because of these reasons is a criminal matter in the State of Maryland."

Transcript:

Interviewer - "And then, just a side note, then it makes it clear to administrators that just because you know, someone doesn't have to be the target of something to be a victim, you can be a victim of intolerance just by witnessing, uh you know, an intolerant act, but then the scary part: it moves on and this is, I'm just going to quote directly, this is the scary part because, I'll tell you the story... I went to UMBC and during their orientation week there was another student, like upperclass, woman who was you know, really... helped integrate us and kind of like you know "dorm mom" or something unofficially. She had a Facebook page where it talked about how she was a lesbian. It was kind of over the top, she, or someone, printed it out and like taped it to the door of her dorm. And so some RA walks by and just decides "no she is not a lesbian and this is mocking lesbians." So I've been at the school for like three days and then I come out of my dorm and then like ten feet away, banging on her door are three uniformed cops, you know with gun, knife, nightstick, mace, to--- to come in and interrogate her about whether she's really a lesbian and whether this is mocking lesbians and it just it had such a instant chilling affect on me and just kind of made me fearful, like "wow I really can't talk about things or else I'm going to have the cops banging on my door. So that's- that's my..."

Interviewee - "Well we should all have so few problems as to be primaryily concerned with who is and who is not a lesbian when they wrote an article. Uh, frankly when people talk about first world problems..."

Interviewer - [laughs] "That's a good point but so-- so the quoting from the-- the school policy: 'University Police may be able to file criminal charges against a perpetrator of an act of intolerance if it is directed towards a specific person because of his or her race, color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or national origin...' and then this is the kicker... this following sentence: 'Actions dir-' and that's just it. Actions. 'Actions directed towards a specific individual because of these reasons is a criminal matter in the state of Maryland.' And I know you're not an expert in Maryland law, but it is definitely 100% not a crime to do anything to someone because of one of those reasons.

If I said "Oh, you know, you're from Venezuela. I don't like Venezuelans" And, according to this, that is a crime in Maryland. That's absurd!

Interviewee - "That's also completely false. Uh I mean I may not be an expert on Maryland state law, but being intolerant or being a bigot or being prejudiced... is frankly not illegal. It might be morally reprehensible, but the state of Maryland could not prohibit it even if it wanted to."

Interviewer - "So, uh, tell us about why something, I don't know if this is legal analysis or just like a social views but why? Why would something like that so clearly legally innaccurate and so dangerous be in like the official policies of a state university?"

Interviewee - "Uh because there are a lot of administrators who need to find something to justify their existence so they look for problems on campus to solve and they look for ways in which to say I am doing something productive, and administrative bloat is definitely one of the reasons this happens. But it's also a good PR stunt. And frnakly, who wants to be the jerk who stands up and say "No I am opposed to this 'anti-intolerance' policy. Nobody really wants to say that because then you look like a jerk. So administrators think they can get away with it."

Interviewer - "Now why don't you give us some, you gave us some it but um, give us some practical advice. You're a student at a university and that's, you take this policy to UMBC and you know that this is pretty horrible... What can you do about it?"

Interviewee - "Go to www.thefire.org and under 'Resources' there is a 'Submit a Case' link that they should use to get in touch with us. That's the best first step I can suggest. Because we want to hear about all those things. But what they can also do is write op-eds in their student paper about why they oppose that policy and explain it in a way that doesn't make them sound like a jerk..."

Interviewer - "Unless that violates the school's policy..."

Interviewee - "Well right, you never know at this point. But you can also; students can also work with administrators to raise concerns with these policies and they can help try and reform them, and we work with students and administrators to do just that. And you know, if it comes down to it, and administrators won't budge, and that's a really, you know, there's a terrible policy on the books... Come to us! We'll help you challenge it, we'll help you fight it in whatever way we can. And frankly, given our track record, chances are we will win."

Interviewer - "So most college's administrators are getting away with this blatantly unconstitutional actions just because people aren't challenging them?"

Interviewee - "Yep! Exactly."

Interviewer - "And I was a student there and I hadn't gone to law school yet and I had the sense that I could maybe challenge it but I would... This is the funny part: just about how the 'culture is against you'. I was a member of the student libritarians. I went to them and said "Hey, I'm thinking about seeing if I can challenge this." And a whole bunch of people are like, "Well... Why? What offensive things do you want to say?" And I was just like, "No! No! I don't want to say offensive things. I just don't want it to be, you know, people getting expelled because of sharing their opinion. So I think that's the first..."

Interviewee - "Right, people miss the forest for the trees (?)."

Interviewer - "So I know that's... Overcoming maybe the potential social stigma as well is a challenge for a student who wants to challenge this things."
Interviewee - "Well, and what I would suggest to anyone who is stationing that kind of argument is to remind them that historically speaking, speech restrictions have been posed by tyrannical majorities to oppress minorities, to keep them down. The entire purpose of free speech is to prevent that from happening. And you look at the civil rights movement, you look at the abolitionist movement, women's suffrage, LGBT rights... None of those movements are possible without power of persuasion and free speech. If the status quo had been able to be maintained and the majority been able to impose speech restrictions, those movements would have been squelched from the outset. I mean we would not nearly be in the place we are today. And that is my response to anyone who says 'Well why is it so important that you don't want to say something offensive.' Because if you are an oppressed minority, your point of view is probably going to be offensive to the power structure."