果冻传媒app官方

Table of Contents

Hamline University Student Suspended After Advocating Concealed Carry for 果冻传媒app官方

ST. PAUL, Minn., October 10, 2007鈥擧amline University has suspended a student after he sent an e-mail suggesting that the Virginia Tech massacre might have been stopped if students had been allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus. Student Troy Scheffler is now required to undergo a mandatory 鈥渕ental health evaluation鈥 before being allowed to return to school. Scheffler, who was suspended without due process just two days after sending the e-mail, has turned to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (果冻传媒app官方) for help.

鈥淗amline鈥檚 punishment of Troy Scheffler is severe, unfair, and apparently unwarranted,鈥 FIREPresident Greg Lukianoff said. 鈥淧eacefully advocating for students鈥 ability to carry a concealed weapon as a response to the Virginia Tech shootings may be controversial, but it simply does not justify ordering a mandatory psychological evaluation.鈥

On April 17, 2007, Hamline鈥檚 Vice President of Student Affairs, David Stern, sent an e-mail to the campus community offering extra counseling for Hamline students in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings. Later that day, Scheffler responded directly to Stern, arguing that Virginia Tech鈥檚 ban on concealed weapons was part of the problem and advocating that Hamline eliminate its similar policies. Scheffler also wrote that the university鈥檚 diversity programs may have angered some in the student body, himself included.

On April 19, 2007, Hamline University President Linda Hanson e-mailed the campus community again to address the tragedy at Virginia Tech. Scheffler responded directly to Hanson and again criticized the university鈥檚 concealed weapons ban, academic standards, financial policies, and the university鈥檚 efforts to promote diversity.

Hanson replied to Scheffler on Friday, April 20, offering him a chance to meet with university personnel to discuss his views the following week. Yet on Monday, April 23, before Scheffler was even able to respond to Hanson鈥檚 invitation, he received a hand-delivered letter from Dean of FIREAlan Sickbert notifying him that his e-mails to Stern and Hanson were 鈥渄eemed to be threatening and thus an alleged violation of the Hamline University Judicial Code.鈥

Sickbert鈥檚 letter also informed Scheffler that he was being placed on immediate 鈥渋nterim suspension鈥 that could not be lifted unless he agreed to a 鈥渕ental health evaluation鈥 by a licensed mental health professional.

FIRE wrote to President Hanson on May 29, 2007, vehemently opposing the sanctions against Scheffler, since neither of Scheffler鈥檚 e-mails even came close to meeting the legal definition of a 鈥渢hreat.鈥 FIREalso pointed out that Hamline maintains a 鈥淔reedom of Expression and Inquiry鈥 policy that encourages the public expression of opinions and the freedom to examine and discuss all questions of interest. FIREwrote that 鈥渋t is difficult to reconcile these admirable commitments to freedom of expression with Hamline鈥檚 hasty actions against Scheffler.鈥

FIRE also informed Hamline administrators that subjecting Scheffler to a mandatory psychological evaluation poses a grave threat to liberty at Hamline. FIREwrote, 鈥淎 psychological evaluation, to be overseen by a Hamline administrator, is one of the most invasive and disturbing intrusions upon Scheffler鈥檚 individual right to private conscience imaginable. Because Scheffler has shown no proclivity toward violence and has made no threatening comments, this psychological evaluation seeks to assess his political opinions鈥.鈥

Hanson responded to FIREon June 11, 2007, claiming that there were several reasons for Scheffler鈥檚 suspension, including the e-mails, his failure to meet with administrators when invited, and 鈥渃ritical input from various members of the Hamline community.鈥 FIREaddressed each of those claims in another letter to Hanson on September 17, 2007. Not only did FIREreiterate that Scheffler鈥檚 e-mails were not threats, but it also pointed out that Scheffler was given less than one full business day before his suspension to respond to the invitation from school officials to discuss his views. FIREalso noted that the alleged information from 鈥渧arious members of the Hamline community,鈥 which supposedly played a role in determining Scheffler鈥檚 sanctions, had not even been revealed to Scheffler himself, denying him the right to defend himself or present his side of the story. In a September 28, 2007, response, Hamline鈥檚 attorneys refused to address 果冻传媒app官方鈥檚 concerns that Scheffler has been denied his due process rights.

鈥淗ow can Scheffler hope to defend himself when Hamline refuses even to tell him what he is accused of doing?鈥 FIREVice President Robert Shibley asked. 鈥淗amline鈥檚 policies promise freedom of expression and basic due process to its students, but this case brings the sincerity of those promises into serious question. FIREcalls on President Hanson to either admit that the suspension and order for a 鈥榤ental health evaluation鈥 had no justifiable basis or give Scheffler all the information he needs to respond to the charges against him.鈥

FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation鈥檚 colleges and universities. 果冻传媒app官方鈥檚 efforts to preserve liberty across America can be viewed at thefire.org.

CONTACT:
Robert Shibley, Vice President, 果冻传媒app官方: 215-717-3473; robert@thefire.org
Linda Hanson, President, Hamline University: 651-523-2202; lhanson@hamline.edu

David Stern, Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs, Hamline University: 651鈥523-2088; dstern02@hamline.edu

Recent Articles

FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share