果冻传媒app官方

Table of Contents

FIRELetter to Brown University President Ruth J. Simmons, October 27, 2006

October 27, 2006

President Ruth J. Simmons
Office of the President
Brown University
One Prospect Street
Campus Box 1860
Providence, Rhode Island 02912

Sent via U.S. Mail and Facsimile (401-863-7737)

Dear President Simmons:

As you can see from our Directors and Board of Advisors, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (果冻传媒app官方) unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of liberty, due process, legal equality, voluntary association, freedom of speech, and religious liberty on America鈥檚 college campuses. Our website, www.thefire.org, will give you a greater sense of our identity and activities.

FIRE is concerned about the threat to freedom of association posed by Brown University鈥檚 recent suspension of the Reformed University Fellowship (RUF), a Christian student organization. While such a suspension is a serious matter demanding careful explanation, the university has so far proffered only a vague and poorly documented account of RUF鈥檚 alleged transgressions. Unless Brown sufficiently explains its reasons for suspending the RUF, the university鈥檚 actions are an affront to religious liberty and freedom of association on campus.

This is our understanding of the facts. Please inform us if you believe we are in error. This fall, Brown鈥檚 Office of the Chaplains and Religious Life (OCRL) suspended the RUF for the 2006-2007 academic year. On September 13, 2006, OCRL Director Reverend Janet Cooper Nelson explained in an e-mail to RUF President Ethan Wingfield that the suspension was the result of 鈥渘on-compliance with University policy and procedure as outlined in The Standards and Conditions Governing the Appointment of Religious Life Affiliates and their Sponsoring Religious Agencies at Brown University.鈥

Based upon communications from the OCRL to the RUF, the reasons for RUF鈥檚 non-compliance with those standards are threefold. First, Cooper Nelson claimed in the September 13 e-mail that Trinity Presbyterian Church, the local sponsoring body for RUF, 鈥渉a[d] withdrawn its sponsorship of RUF, effective immediately, for the 2006-07 academic year.鈥 Second, Associate Protestant University Chaplain Reverend Allen Callahan explained to Cooper Nelson in an e-mail on September 13 that RUF 鈥渉ad not been a 鈥榬ecognized student organization鈥 since the fall of last year,鈥 because RUF鈥檚 then-adviser, Eric Molicki, failed to submit the required paperwork on time to renew his status as RUF鈥檚 Religious Life Affiliate. Third, Callahan wrote in that same e-mail that:

鈥he irresponsibility of RUF鈥檚 leadership last year and this year has led OCRL to refuse to renew RUF Religious Life Status again this year. 鈥U]nder the leadership of Rev. Molicki and last year鈥檚 and now this year鈥檚 student president Ethan Wingfield, RUF hs (sic) become possessed of a leadership culture of contempt and dishonesty that has rendered all collegial relations with my office impossible.

While Brown is a private institution and therefore not directly bound by the First Amendment, the university does promise its students 鈥渢he rights of peaceful assembly, free exchange of ideas and orderly protest, and the right to attend, make use of or enjoy the facilities and functions of the University subject to prescribed rules.鈥 Denial of those rights is a serious matter requiring a reasonable explanation.

OCRL鈥檚 explanations for suspending RUF are questionable at best. First, Cooper Nelson was mistaken in stating that Trinity Presbyterian Church had withdrawn its support of RUF. Within the same day that Cooper Nelson notified RUF of its suspension, Trinity Pastor David Sherwood sent an e-mail to Cooper Nelson saying that 鈥淭rinity Presbyterian Church has not, in any sense, withdrawn its sponsorship of RUF. In fact, the governing body of the church has not taken any action of any kind with respect to RUF.鈥 Trinity鈥檚 supposed withdrawal of support should therefore not have been a consideration in suspending RUF.

Second, RUF was not aware of any suspension supposedly in place since last year. The group continued to function as a recognized student group throughout the 2005-2006 academic year, retaining its right to reserve rooms for meetings. Moreover, Eric Molicki has been replaced as RUF鈥檚 Religious Life Affiliate by Edward Park, who submitted the necessary renewal paperwork this year well before the deadline. Neither the failure to submit a form on time last year, nor a supposed punishment of which the group was unaware, should have any bearing on RUF鈥檚 status for this academic year.

RUF鈥檚 suspension therefore seems to rest solely upon OCRL鈥檚 final explanation, which relies upon vague accusations. To what does a 鈥渓eadership culture of contempt and dishonesty鈥 refer? The record shows no proof of a pattern of hostility on the part of RUF toward the OCRL, but rather a good-faith effort to mend any possible discord. In an e-mail dated March 13, Wingfield apologized to Callahan for any previous animosity relating to RUF鈥檚 difficulty in securing rooms for meetings, stating, 鈥淚 beg your forgiveness for my haste and disrespect.鈥 In a letter dated September 28, RUF鈥檚 leadership asked the OCRL to explain the ways in which RUF has cultivated a 鈥渃ulture of contempt and dishonesty鈥 and requested to know the terms of the group鈥檚 reinstatement. As of the date of this letter, RUF has not received a reply.

In an office that 鈥渨orks to ensure that all beliefs can find a home on campus鈥 and attempts to 鈥減romote communication and understanding among all religious groups,鈥 freedom of association should not be at the mercy of administrative caprice. While the 鈥淪tandards and Conditions Governing the Appointment of Religious Life Affiliates and Sponsoring Religious Agencies at Brown University鈥 grants the OCRL the power to suspend a group鈥檚 right to exist, the office should never abuse that power. The OCRL鈥檚 reasons for suspending a student group should at all times be objective, clear, and legitimate. Those very basic standards have not been met in this case, making RUF鈥檚 suspension unjust.

FIRE is committed to seeing this situation through to a just and moral conclusion. To this end, we request that Brown University either offer a reasonable explanation for the RUF鈥檚 suspension or revoke the suspension, allowing the RUF to recommence meeting. We further request that you reexamine the manner in which the Office of the Chaplains and Religious Life treats the student groups under its purview to ensure that all students and all organizations are treated equitably.

We request a response on this matter by November 10, 2006.

Sincerely,

Tara E. Sweeney
Senior Program Officer

cc:
Rev. Janet Cooper Nelson, University Chaplain and Director of the Office of the Chaplains and Religious Life, Brown University
Rev. Allen Callahan, Interim Associate Protestant University Chaplain, Brown University
Russell Carey, Interim Vice President for Campus Life and Student Services, Brown University
Margaret Klawunn, Associate Vice President for Campus Life and Dean for Student Life, Brown University
Marylou McMillan, Executive Officer for Campus Life and Student Services, Brown University

Share