SUBRAMANIAN: Rutgers needs to pass 'Chicago Statement'
Column: Whadda I Know
In the fall of 2022, I wrote an article for The Daily Targum about the decline of free speech on college campuses. While this is a problem affecting universities overall, there is plenty of evidence that free speech needs to be upheld, specifically at Rutgers.
As I mentioned in the article, in 2019, the Rutgers Conservative Union was successful in getting the Targum defunded. As a result of losing the referendum, the newspaper, the second oldest college paper in the U.S., lost $540,000 and has not published a physical copy since.
This paper allows the students to express themselves and discuss issues concerning the student body. As such, limiting the paper’s influence limits the voice of the students.
Even in the student handbook, some provisions do raise free speech concerns. For example, Section IV, Subsection H and Subsubsection 1 state that bullying, intimidation and harassment include: "Making any communication to another person in any manner likely to cause alarm, including through electronic or social media platforms."
On the surface, this provision does not seem to be harmful. After all, most people would not want cyberbullying to occur at Rutgers. The real problem comes when looking at the details, specifically the phrase: "any manner likely to cause alarm."
What does that mean? Different things could cause different people to be alarmed. While not intending to limit healthy expression among students, this large blanket statement can be used as a launchpad to target students for their opinions.
With this in mind, what can we do to fix this at Rutgers? While this is a challenging problem, one step to remedying this problem would be to pass the Chicago Statement.
What is the Chicago Statement?
It was created in July 2014 at the University of Chicago by the 13th President Robert J. Zimmer and 12th Provost Eric D. Isaacs. In this statement, both Zimmer and Isaacs state concerns with the current university system regarding free speech suppression.
They explain that a university's goal is not to shield students from controversial or unpopular ideas but rather to be an open forum for discourse and debate. In doing so, universities can live up to their purpose of educating students and preparing them for the real world.
The Chicago Statement also recognizes that there are some instances where speech can be misused. For instance, "the university may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or confidentiality interests, or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of the university," according to the statement.
This provision makes it clear that universities have a duty to ensure their students are safe. At the same time, these provisions are very clear-cut and specific as opposed to the Rutgers policy listed in the handbook. By crafting a specific policy, the Chicago Statement strikes a good balance between the safety of students and their rights.
This statement has had a significant impact, as 97 institutions have endorsed or adopted the Chicago Statement or a similar variant to date.
These institutions include fellow Big Ten members, Ohio State University, the University of Maryland and Michigan State University. Though some of these universities may struggle with free speech issues, having a Chicago Statement passed by their Senates, Board of Trustees and/or governing organizations is an overall net positive for free speech.
The Chicago Statement gives students more power to exercise their rights. Knowing that there is a policy on the books and a strong commitment to these protections will allow students to better stand up for themselves if Rutgers attempts to unfairly silence them.
If adopted by Rutgers, policies like the Chicago Statement would help create a healthy, productive and safe free speech environment.
This is more important now than ever.
For example, Stanford University attempted to push an Orwellian Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative, which included removing words such as "crazy," "brave," "American" and "Karen" from Stanford's websites. Ensuring that our universities protect students' rights is essential in creating well-functioning members of society.
With this piece, I encourage the Rutgers University Student Assembly, University President Jonathan Holloway, the Rutgers University Senate, the Board of Trustees and the Board of Governors to look into passing the Chicago Statement at this University.
But hey, whadda I know?
Kiran Subramanian is a junior in the School of Arts and Sciences majoring in economics and political science. His column, "Whadda I Know," runs on alternate Fridays.
*Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Due to space limitations in our print newspaper, letters to the editor must not exceed 900 words. Guest columns and commentaries must be between 700 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com by 4 p.m. to be considered for the following day's publication. Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
