Table of Contents
Victory for Freedom of Speech at Indiana University鈥揝outh Bend
SOUTH BEND, Ind., September 20, 2007鈥擨ndiana University鈥揝outh Bend (IUSB) has reversed its punishment of a student reporter who was found guilty of 鈥渃onduct that is lewd, indecent or obscene鈥 for interviewing members of a campus group about their production of the play 鈥淭he Vagina Monologues.鈥 Student Robert Francis appealed to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (果冻传媒app官方), which successfully pressured the university to overturn its unjust decision.
鈥淔IREis pleased that IUSB correctly reversed its decision to punish Robert Francis for engaging in constitutionally protected speech and journalistic investigation,鈥 FIREPresident Greg Lukianoff said. 鈥淏ut the case against Francis should have never progressed to the level it did. Decades of Supreme Court decisions protect students鈥 rights to engage in provocative and 鈥榦ffensive鈥 expression. The same standards that protect students鈥 rights to perform a play like 鈥楾he Vagina Monologues鈥 also protect Francis鈥 right to discuss that play.鈥
Every Valentine鈥檚 Day, members of an IUSB campus group, the V-Club, stage a production of Eve Ensler鈥檚 鈥淭he Vagina Monologues.鈥 In February 2007, Francis, a 47-year-old student reporter, began a series of articles about the play for IUSB鈥檚 student newspaper, The Preface. While interviewing one actress about her role in a segment of the play called 鈥淗air鈥濃攚hich involves a woman discussing the sensation and social implications of shaving her pubic hair鈥擣rancis engaged in a conversation about the issues addressed in that role. 鈥淢y line of questioning was in regard to the topic of the play. Under other circumstances, the discussion might have seemed inappropriate, but I took my cue from subjects the actress brought up,鈥 Francis said.
Yet the actress, an instructor at IUSB, filed a complaint against Francis, and after an informal meeting with Francis, IUSB Director of Judicial Affairs Charlotte Pfeifer charged him with 鈥渃onduct that is lewd, indecent, or obscene鈥 and, strangely, 鈥渟talking or hazing.
Pfeifer suggested that Francis鈥 punishment include a 鈥減rocessing session,鈥 or mandatory psychological counseling with an IUSB counselor; a 鈥渙ne-way listening session鈥 where Francis would not be allowed to speak but would have to listen to his accusers tell him how they felt degraded by his interviews; and the requirement that he view and write a response paper on a film about sensitivity. On June 8, a Hearing Commission dismissed the 鈥渟talking or hazing鈥 charge but found Francis guilty of 鈥渃onduct that is lewd, indecent, or obscene.鈥 The Hearing Commission report stated that, 鈥渄uring [Francis鈥橾 interview鈥 [he] crossed the line from the educational discussion of the cultural issues of a woman shaving (or not) her vagina to sexually explicit and crass comments that were demeaning to women.鈥
Francis and Student Government Association Chief Justice Charles Norton, who has aided Francis through this process, appealed to 果冻传媒app官方, which wrote a letter to IUSB Chancellor Una Mae Reck on August 21. FIREexplained that IUSB cannot, under the First Amendment, find Francis guilty of improper conduct simply because he asked questions and made comments that some would interpret as offensive. FIREalso highlighted that in addition to the clear double standard at work in this case, IUSB overstepped its bounds by unconstitutionally sanctioning Francis with invasive psychological counseling. Luckily, an IUSB counselor agreed that a 鈥減rocessing session鈥 was unnecessary and spared Francis the intrusion of having his thoughts evaluated. FIREdemanded that IUSB reverse the finding against Francis and strike the 鈥済uilty鈥 decision from his record.
IUSB鈥檚 Associate General Counsel Kiply S. Drew responded to FIREon September 18 by reporting that Chancellor Reck overturned the decision against Francis because the sanctions were improperly imposed 鈥渂ased on speech rather than conduct.鈥 Drew wrote, however, that the university would not remove evidence of the complaint from Francis鈥 record, as FIREhad requested. IUSB鈥檚 September 18 letter to Francis also says that the university will dismiss a complaint that Francis filed against the V-Club. In that complaint, Francis alleged that members of the club conspired to suppress his article and that Pfeifer both facilitated the complaint against him and pressured The Preface鈥檚 editor to cut the article. The Preface subsequently refused to print Francis鈥 article and fired him as a student reporter. A Student Government Association Defense Brief provides evidence of Francis鈥 allegations, but university officials have refused to investigate them.
鈥淔IREis happy that IUSB has acknowledged it cannot sanction a student on the basis of protected speech,鈥 FIREDirector of Legal and Public Advocacy Samantha Harris said. 鈥淏ut we still have serious concerns. Allowing a frivolous, overturned complaint to remain on a student鈥檚 permanent file represents an unnecessary blemish upon his record. Dismissing Francis鈥 independent complaint against the V-Club without fully investigating it is also problematic. FIREwill continue to pursue this case until we are satisfied that IUSB has undone its damage to Robert Francis.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:
Samantha Harris, Director of Legal and Public Advocacy, 果冻传媒app官方: 215-717-3473; samantha@thefire.org
Una Mae Reck, Chancellor, IUSB: 574-520-4872; maereck@iusb.edu
Charlotte Pfeifer, Director of Judicial Affairs, IUSB: 574-520-5524; judicial@iusb.edu
Recent Articles
FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.