¹ū¶³“«Ć½app¹Ł·½

Table of Contents

A crack in the ice, but no thaw: Frostburg State wonā€™t ā€˜terminateā€™ RAs who speak out about COVID-19, but it might ā€˜educateā€™ them

chilling effect

Last month, the autumn air at Marylandā€™s Frostburg State University got a bit more chilly, as administrators warned that resident assistants ā€” the students who help the universityā€™s residential systems function ā€” would be in line for an ā€œattitudeā€ adjustment in their employment reviews if they publicly criticized the universityā€™s response to COVID-19. That put the public university, which has over its handling of the pandemic, in the same league as other institutions that have moved to deter students and faculty from drawing public attention to institutional responses to the novel coronavirus.

The First Amendment doesnā€™t only kick in after an employee gets a pink slip.

FIRE wrote to the university to explain that this ā€œattitudeā€ evaluation violates the First Amendment rights of its RAs, who ā€” like other employees of public institutions ā€” have a right to speak as private citizens on matters of public concern. FIREdiscussing whether their workplaces and homes are safe during a pandemic are well within their First Amendment rights. Administrators at a public university have no business grading them for their ā€œattitude.ā€

Frostburg State responded to our letter, showing some thaw in its chilling response to criticism, telling RAs that they will not be ā€œterminated just because they have their own opinions about the university.ā€ 

Thatā€™s almost the bare minimum of what the First Amendment requires. If thatā€™s all that the university said, it could be forgiven for awkward phrasing about whether students would be ā€œterminatedā€ only because they have opinions. But the First Amendment doesnā€™t only kick in after an employee gets a pink slip. It protects them from retaliation that would deter a person of ā€œordinary firmnessā€ ā€” a legal term of art ā€” from continuing to speak out. 

Curbing public criticism is not a way for the university to address that issue.

The balance of the universityā€™s response is unhelpful. It argues that a ā€œsense of communityā€ requires a ā€œcampus where students and staff accept their obligations to the groupā€ and that with respect to any ā€œUniversity[-]paid student it is our first expectation that concerns about the department where they work are shared and addressed by the appropriate supervisor.ā€ 

Thatā€™s a poor conception of the relationship between students and the state employer. The university could hope that students will share their concerns with their supervisors, but framing it as an ā€œexpectationā€ indicates that itā€™s a duty to keep criticism private. If students are complaining publicly, that should be an indication to the university that its students do not feel they have responsive avenues to voice and resolve their concerns internally. Curbing public criticism is not a way for the university to address that issue.

Frostburg Stateā€™s response continues: ā€œWhen students express negative opinions about the workplace it is incumbent to try to resolve the matters if possible,ā€ and the university will ā€œuse thisā€ ā€” presumably referring to instances of public criticism of the institution ā€” ā€œas a teaching moment because when students go into the workplace there are certainly some restrictions that may or may not support the open expression of concerns.ā€

Itā€™s true that many private employers, empowered by at-will employment law, would not tolerate public criticism by their employees. But a public university ā€” a state actor unquestionably bound by the First Amendment ā€” cannot justify censoring its student employees on the basis that they wonā€™t have comparable rights off-campus. 

Agreeing that its RAs wonā€™t be terminated only because they hold negative opinions is a crack in the ice at Frostburg State, but itā€™s not the studentsā€™ attitudes that need adjustment when administrators havenā€™t learned from a ā€œteaching momentā€ of their own.

You can read Frostburg State's response to FIREhere:


FIRE defends the rights of students and faculty members ā€” no matter their views ā€” at public and private universities and colleges in the United States. If your rights are in jeopardy, get in touch with us: thefire.org/alarm.

Recent Articles

FIREā€™s award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share