The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression called out the revised space use policy as overly broad in a letter sent Monday to Chancellor Marcelo Suárez-Orozco.
In the letter, FIRE Policy Reform Program Manager Ross Marchand wrote that the policy “violates students’ free speech rights and creates a vague, unworkable standard for allowing impromptu protests.”
A spokesperson for the university said he had not yet seen the letter in a 3:56 p.m. email Monday. He did not comment further when provided with a copy of the letter obtained by The Mass Media.
The letter began by addressing the section of the space use policy that addresses chalk drawings, which prohibits “chalking that contains hate-oriented language or a similar remark.”
FIRE wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the government, including public university administrators, may not censor speech “on the basis that others take offense to it.”
“In addition, the phrase ‘hate-oriented language or a similar remark’ is exceedingly broad and can take on any meaning an administrator ascribes to it,” FIRE wrote.
It also criticized a section of the policy that requires 5 days’ notice for planned demonstrations, with exceptions only for demonstrations that “are caused by news or affairs coming into the public knowledge less than 24-hours previously.”
FIRE wrote that determining whether the subject of a protest occurred within the last 24 hours is “an inherently subjective assessment,” opening the door to potential abuse of the policy.
“Protestors may claim they are spontaneously demonstrating in response to the latest battle or casualties of a war, only for administrators to respond that the underlying war is months old and cannot be the subject of spontaneous expression,” FIRE wrote. “Complex, on-the-fly arithmetic spanning time zones should be left to the mathematics department, not school administrators looking to police speech.”
Earlier this month, the Faculty Staff Union, Classified Staff Union and Professional Staff Union sent letters demanding that the university cease and desist enforcement of the policy. They argue that the policy restricts unions’ rights to demonstrate, and administration should have bargained prior to implementing it.
FIRE said they have worked with other universities to draft improved expression policies. They wrote, “We would be happy to do so again to help UMass Boston enact policies and practices that respect and protect students’ right to free expression.”
