Oregon bill proposes that student media be immune from civil and criminal liability
By Ame Phitwong
With the introduction on March of a new Oregon state bill, HB 3279, high school and college students may soon be protected from censorship. One portion of the new bill states "All student-sponsored media are public forums and school officials and governing boards are immune from civil and criminal liability based on student expression."
Michael Mulcrone, a communication studies professor who teaches media law at UP, described censorship as prior restraint or prevention of a story from being published.
"I think [censorship] happens a lot more often than it should," Mulcrone said. "Oftentimes when censorship happens, it has to do with the image of the school or adverse publicity."
The current Oregon constitution guarantees everyone the right to speak, write or print freely on any subject. According to the Student Press Law Center, State Representative Larry Galizio (D-Tigard) introduced the bill because he felt the current constitution was too "broad" and wanted to ensure that students would be shielded from community and administrative opposition to stories written on sensitive issues.
Washington state had a similar bill introduced in January, which motivated Galizio to do the same for Oregon.
In regards to UP, the bill will not have much effect on student media on campus. Mulcrone explained that the First Amendment only applies to schools funded by the government. Furthermore, the First Amendment only prevents government censorship.
"In the case of campus newspapers published at private universities, like UP, the First Amendment rights belong to the publisher of the paper and not to the staff. The issue of federal funding is not an issue when it comes to the First (Amendment)," Mulcrone said. At private institutions, "it's up to school administrators. [State officials] can do whatever they want; it wouldn't affect private schools at all."
"Because we go to a super conservative school, there's not much we can do about it," junior Arne Johnson said. "It's bad because we should be able to hear and bring what we want to campus without fear of the administration. I don't feel censored or afraid to say what I think, but I think UP as a whole is too sheltered and limited from the free exchange of ideas."
One case of student censorship that was presented to the United States Supreme Court on Friday was Morse and the Juneau School Board v. Frederick. The case concerned a high school student in Alaska who was suspended for displaying a 14-foot-long banner with the message, "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" in 2002.
The lawsuit was filed by the family of Joseph Frederick and contended that his First Amendment rights were infringed when the school suspended him. Frederick waved the sign outside of school grounds on a public sidewalk as the Olympic torch moved though Juneau for the Winter Games in Salt Lake City, Utah. The school argued that Frederick was participating in a school-sponsored event accompanied by teachers when the incident occurred. The principal, Deborah Morse, ordered Frederick to remove the sign and he refused. This consequently led to his ten-day suspension for promoting illegal drug use, a violation of school policy.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Calif., agreed with Frederick and decided the school did not present any evidence that he had disrupted the school's educational mission by displaying the banner off campus.
The ruling on this case will decide a school's ability to regulate speech regarding illegal drugs off school grounds.
Junior Katy Bern said, "I feel that if I were to address issues the University was uncomfortable with due to being a Catholic institution, I'd feel uncomfortable just because of the status ... even though we should feel comfortable. The University should promote freedom of expression."
In the UP Student Handbook there are several guidelines regarding student expression. It states that students and student organizations are free to examine and discuss topics of interest and express their opinions publicly and privately. However, they should support their causes by orderly means which do not disrupt the regular and essential order of the University. The handbook also makes it clear that a student should represent his or her opinions as their own and not that of UP.
Furthermore, it states that "any conduct which restrains either the freedom of expression or the freedom of movement of others who do not agree, or if it is disruptive of University operations, is unacceptable."
People who violate this rule "should expect to be charged, arrested and prosecuted" and well as subjected to University judicial action, the Handbook states.
In regards to bringing speakers to campus, the speaker must be sponsored by a faculty member, a department, or a recognized student group.
"Where special problems can be foreseen at events dealing with highly charged and emotional issues," the University president or his delegates can take action to "prescribe conditions to ensure an atmosphere of open exchange" and that UP's "educational objectives are not obscured."
"Censorship sends a bad message to students," Mulcrone said. "Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of democracy. Without free flow of information, students can't make informed decisions as adults."
