The UNC System’s In-Process Free Speech Regulations

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
November 19, Employment and Recruitment 2. Non-Discrimination Notice 3. Sexual Harassment 4. Criminal Background Check 5. Child Abuse and Neglect.
Advertisements

REPORTING VIOLATIONS OF PROBATION
The Adjudication Process Virginia Department of Health Professions New Board Member Training October 2008.
Harassment, Intimidation, and Bullying Policies and Legislation
2010 Region II Conference Corporate Compliance Panel June 3, 2010
The CUNY Policy on Expressive Conduct Presented by BMCC Academic Freedom Committee February 26, 2014.
Hanoi, 22-23/5/2007 INTRODUCTION ON THE BIODIVERSITY LAW Presented by: Huynh Thi Mai Department of Environment - MONRE MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND.
UNIFORM GUIDANCE OVERVIEW. OMB Circulars Before and After A-21 Cost principles for Educational Institutions A-21 Cost principles for Educational Institutions.
Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly. The Purpose of Freedom of Speech 1 to guarantee to each person a right of free expression, in the spoken and.
COMMISSION FOR PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION 14 TH Meeting, CEEDPA may, Kyiv LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR DATA PROTECTION, COMPETENCES AND PRIORITIES OF THE COMMISSION.
Legal Case Studies November 8,  1 st Amendment to US Constitution  4 th Amendment to US Constitution  Tinker vs. Des Moines.
Constitutional Law Part 8: First Amendment: Freedom of Expression Lecture 3: Places Available for Speech.
Confidentiality for Transportation Personnel.  Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)  Kentucky Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 2 Business and the Constitution.
Student Rights and Responsibilities Student Conduct and The University of Wyoming Regulations.
Policies that guide us Overview: Government of Yukon Contract and Procurement Regulation and Contracting and Procurement Directive.
The Constitution. Fundamental Principles of the Constitution Popular Sovereignty Limited Government Separation of Powers Checks and Balances Judicial.
Safeguarding Research Data Policy and Implementation Challenges Miguel Soldi February 24, 2006 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM.
Chapter 1: Ethics and Law. Four Sources of Law 1. Constitutional Law 2. Statutory Law 3. Case Law 4. Administrative Law * English Common Law.
UMBC POLICY ON ESH MANAGEMENT & ENFORCEMENT UMBC Policy #VI
DRAFT Proposed Sexual Harassment Policy Office of General Counsel Southern Illinois University September 2008.
Legal Latin  Certiorari: SIR-shee-uh-RARE-ee  Stare decisis: STAIR-ee dee-SIGH-sis  Amicus curiae: uh-MEE-kuss CURE-ee-EYE  Ratio decidendi: RAY-shee-oh.
1 PARCC Data Privacy & Security Policy December 2013.
Statutes and Ordinances An introduction to University processes.
NATIONAL CONFERENCE Intellectual Property Policies for Universities and Innovation dr. sc. Vlatka Petrović Head, Technology Transfer Office Acting Head,
School Law and the Public Schools: A Practical Guide for Educational Leaders, 5e © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 3 Students,
The MESICIC Experience & Civil Society Participation.
VICTORIAN CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Virginia RULES Teens Learn & Live the Law Introduction to Laws in Virginia.
“ The Bill of Rights” The First 10 Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
Gail Davidson. Approved unanimously by the UN General Assembly on December 10,  Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression;
Introduction to the planning system for elected members​
RATIFICATION OF THE 1991 FAL AMENDMENTS TO THE CONVENTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION, 1948 A PRESENTATION TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE OF.
Code of Ethics and Ethics Panel
Intro to Laws in Virginia
Threat Assessment Team Florida State University
(Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services)
Districts of Innovation: After the Plan
Special Education Legal Boot Camp
Principles of Administrative Law <Instructor Name>
The University of Texas at Arlington
Government and Law Making
The UNC System’s In-Process Free Speech Regulations
Agenda 5.11 General Regulations
Faculty Assembly Delegation, UNC-Chapel Hill
BULLYING AND MORE Presented by Dana Rahman Assistant District Attorney
StudentAffairs.com Case Study
North Carolina Community College Governance
Policy Development in Yukon Education
Exploring Time, Place, and Manner
Virtual Case Study Competition
§ 1-6. Powers The General Faculty has power:
European actions.
Downingtown Area School District Central Office April 4, 2018
United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights
West Virginia Economic Development Council Open Meetings Act Training 2018 Derek Knopp Staff Attorney West Virginia Ethics Commission.
We want to critique current practices to remain relevant, challenge our campus to engage in understanding their first amendment rights, and champion.
The UNC System’s In-Process Free Speech Regulations
Colorado state university-pueblo policy and administration (PA)
Fundamental rights.
OPEN GOVERNMENTAL PROCEEDINGS ACT April 18, 2017
Ohio Government.
How much for the “Free” Speech?
John Stanskas, ASCCC President Kelly Fowler, CCCCIO President
The Importance of Your Votes - Voting Procedures
Public Safety and Title IX Administrators: Working Together
2018 Free Speech Training.
Transparency Serbia Presentation September 27th 2010
Resolutions & Amendments
Annual Training for Supervisors
Presentation transcript:

The UNC System’s In-Process Free Speech Regulations Eric Muller, UNC School of Law and Member, Faculty Executive Committee

Became law on July 31, 2017, after Governor Cooper did not sign it.

The Process Thus Far BOG shared draft of policy with Faculty Assembly FA input (Profs Timothy Ives (UNC School of Pharmacy), David Green (Law, NC Central), Kim Cogdell (Law, NC Central), Jim Martin (Chemistry, NCSU)) Main goal: ensure that BOG policy is no broader than the statute requires Some changes accepted by BOG; others not Input/reaction from others affected by policy as well (including staff, students, campus-level counsels’ offices, others) BOG Committee on University Governance approved a draft of policy on Friday, 11/3 Modifications continue to be made Up for consideration/vote by full BOG at meeting on December 15 Came before FEC on Monday, November 6. Because the target is still moving, and time is very short, FEC decided to inform Faculty Council rather than attempt a resolution

The Draft BOG Policy as of Now(ish): An Overview Purpose of policy is to support and assist campuses in efforts to embrace free speech rights and balance them with protections against unlawful activity. II. Lengthy affirmation of the university’s and the General Assembly’s support for established principles of free expression, with this addition: “It is not the proper role of any constituent institution to shield individuals from speech protected by the First Amendment, including, without limitation, ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.” III. Campuses may not act on current public policy controversies in a way that requires anyone to publicly express a particular view.

The Draft BOG Policy as of Now(ish): An Overview IV. Students, staff and faculty may gather for expressive activity if it is lawful and does not “materially and substantially disrupt the functioning” of a campus. A “material and substantial disruption” is one or more of four things: a. disorderly conduct in violation of state law b. disruption of a public meeting in violation of state law c. violation of a chancellor-designated curfew under state law d. conduct actually triggering a trespass notice from law enforcement.

The Draft BOG Policy as of Now(ish): An Overview IV. (continued) Consistent with established First Amendment principles, campuses are open to any speaker invited by students or faculty. But much of the property of the university is dedicated to the campus’s instruction and research functions, and the campuses can exclude people from those areas in order to prevent disruption to those functions. V. Campuses are allowed to restrict types of expression that are not protected under the First Amendment (e.g., defamatory expression) VI. Campuses are required to take steps to inform students, faculty, staff, and the general public about their First Amendment policies.

The Draft BOG Policy as of Now(ish): An Overview VII. Consequences Campuses have to implement and enforce a range of sanctions – extending to dismissal or expulsion – for those who substantially disrupt a campus’s functioning. “Substantial disruption” means the four legal violations mentioned earlier, and can include a protest that “materially infringes” on the right of an audience to listen to a scheduled speaker in a nonpublic setting. A counter-protester can also run afoul of the policy by disrupting a protester who is engaged in an “acceptable form of dissent.”

VII. Consequences (continued) The Draft BOG Policy as of Now(ish): An Overview VII. Consequences (continued) A first offense can lead to discipline including suspension, expulsion, or dismissal. The presumptive punishment is at least a suspension for a second offense and expulsion (student) or dismissal (faculty/staff) for a third, but a campus can impose a different sanction if warranted. Charged individuals are entitled to a variety of procedural protections in the adjudication of their claimed offenses. VIII. Each campus has to identify who is responsible for ensuring compliance with the policy and, as requested, reporting to the BOG Committee on Free Expression. Those individuals will be trained by the UNC School of Government.