Free Speech

There are a few limits to free speech. For example, unprotected speech includes “fighting words” (i.e. personally abusive epithets or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs), “true threats” (i.e. serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular person or group of individuals) and “incitement” (i.e. speech that is directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action or likely to incite or produce such action). 
Also, Universities can impose time, place, and manner restrictions on protests for the purpose of preventing protesters from disrupting the normal work of the campus, including the educational environment and administrative operations. A campus can also impose content neutral restrictions (like the ability to hang posters in certain locations) to ensure a supportive learning environment for students.

Hate speech and hate crimes are two different things. Hate speech may be protected as free speech but a hate crime is not protected by the First Amendment. Hate speech incidents are broadly or generally directed to individuals or groups,  or include an action that, while disturbing and could cause negative consequences such as loss of mutual respect. 

It is important to note that while hate speech can be allowable, it can be very harmful to individuals and groups. And, since we are an institution of education/professional setting, we can expect students, faculty, and staff to treat each other with professionalism and mutual respect in the educational setting.

Bias is a preconceived negative opinion or attitude about a group of people who possess common physical characteristics or cultural experience. While it could be disturbing and could cause negative consequences such as loss of mutual respect, it is not criminal or a University policy violation.

Harassment is unwelcome conduct that is sufficiently severe, persistent or pervasive, and subjectively and objectively offensive as to substantially or effectively disrupt or undermine a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from a University program or activity, including, but not limited to, employment. Bias does not raise to the level of harassment in regard to University policy unless it reaches to the level of this definition.

Sometimes the intent of what a person says is very different from the impact on the person receiving. It is a good idea to not make assumptions about what they are saying. It is a good idea to ask for clarification about what they intended to communicate. It is 100% okay to point out that malicious intent is not welcomed.

It is important to note that faculty members have what is called academic freedom (Academic Freedom) and all employees do have the right to free speech. Sometimes in class/lab/organization meetings conversations fall outside these lines. To address possible harm done, the appropriate supervisor would have a dialogue with that faculty or staff member to bring forward the student’s impact on the statements made.

We encourage you to consider resolving your concerns, if appropriate, on an informal basis. It is often difficult to confront a person and can be particularly difficult when the person engaging in the behaviors holds actual or perceived power over the person at whom it is directed. There are occasions, however, when an individual feels able to speak up.  Tell that person that the behavior is offensive and request it stop. Tell the person that you will take further action if the behavior doesn't stop. We always encourage in-person dialogue, but it can be done by phone, email, or letter, and may resolve the matter without further issue. Be respectful in your tone. Use “I” language (“It upsets me when you say things like <insert> , I’m wondering if you are open to discuss?”). Use a joke (“Whoa... you are way outside my comfort bubble”). It is never a good idea to bully, threaten, or shame during these interactions.  

See the Resource section for additional information from the Southern Poverty Law Center on Four Steps From Inaction To Intervention

However, If informal attempts at resolution are unsuccessful, inappropriate, or if you do not feel comfortable addressing the concerns, the University can assist you by contacting one of the resources listed above.

If an employee’s social media posts are outside of work, and they are posting as a citizen and not a representative of Michigan Tech, a citizen can post or share what they want. If an employee wants to post as a citizen, it is highly recommended that they do not identify themselves as an employee at Michigan Tech and state on their profile this statement; "All views posted here represent exclusively my own views and not those of my employer."  Of course, employees can choose to have a professional page/profile and a personal page/profile.  Please note that posts could matter, posting either as a Michigan Tech employee or as a citizen, for example, if a person participates publicly in a controversial matter discussion, the question could be asked; can they still do their job effectively?

Michigan Technological University is a public institution, and our outdoor (and many indoor) spaces are available for public use. Any individual or group may submit a request to use our outside grounds, even if that individual or group is not affiliated with the University. When reviewing those requests, Michigan Tech — in keeping with the First Amendment of the US Constitution — does not discriminate based on viewpoint.

The Southern Poverty Law Center recommends Four Steps From Inaction To Intervention

Public harassment or hate violence can occur unexpectedly in virtually any location. It may be on a bus, at school, at a shopping center, in a park or at any number of other public spaces. The unpredictable nature of such harassment can leave us feeling unprepared when an incident occurs. If you remember four key points, however, you can effectively respond.

1. Know What Public Harassment Looks Like. Understanding that harassment is happening – and why it’s happening – is the first step toward effective intervention. Recognize that harassment exists on a spectrum of actions ranging from hurtful comments and gestures to violence. The type of bigotry fueling the harassment can also run the gamut. Racism, sexism, ageism, classism, xenophobia, homophobia or religious discrimination are a few examples.
2. Be Aware Of Your Identity Before Taking Action. Look at who you are – or who you are perceived to be – at the intersection of race, sex, religion, color, gender, size, orientation, ability, age and origin. Awareness is important because a harasser may target you for your identity. In other words, your direct intervention could escalate the situation. If you share the same identity as the person committing the harassment, if you wield some authority, or if you are otherwise part of the dominant culture, your identity may allow you to de-escalate the situation by speaking to the harasser or intervening in a manner in which others are unable. Whatever your identity, it’s important to tap into your experiences to effectively respond. Remember a time when you may have been targeted for harassment or hate violence. It may have been last week or when you were younger and bullied in school. By reflecting on your own experiences, you will be able to empathize with the person targeted, which is important for effective intervention.Just as you may not have been able to respond when you were targeted, it’s important to remember that the person targeted may feel the same way. And if nobody came to your aid, you should remember what you would have wanted a bystander to do. If you have never been harassed, imagine what it might feel like to be targeted. What would you want someone to do? If you know someone who has been harassed, tap into their experiences when you encounter an incident. These measures can help prepare you to act when you might otherwise find yourself on the sidelines.
3. Recognize Your Blocks, Or Reasons Why You May Not Intervene. We all have such blocks. Sometimes we’re scared. Other times, we may feel we can’t make a difference – even if we act. We may believe it’s simply not our problem, especially if no one else is doing anything. We might minimize the harassment or not even recognize the behavior as harassment. (A list examining some of the most common blocks – and why we should still take action – are examined elsewhere in this guide.) Whatever reasons stand in your way, the most important thing is to be aware of your blocks before choosing one of “The Five Ds of Bystander Intervention” that works for you.
4. When An Incident Occurs, Choose One Of “The Five D’s Of Bystander Intervention.” Each of the Ds offers a clear path of action. They include the following: 

•  Direct: “That’s not cool.” Directly address the incident or harasser by stating that what’s happening is inappropriate or disrespectful. Direct intervention has many risks; exercise it with caution and assess the situation for your safety first;
• Distract: “Hey, what time is it?” Use distraction to stop the incident. The goal is to interrupt the incident by engaging the person being targeted and ignoring the harasser; 
• Delegate: “Can I get your help over here?” Ask for help from a third party like a manager in the store, a driver on the bus, or a faculty or staff member on campus; 
• Delay: “Are you OK?” If you can’t take action in the moment, you can make a difference afterward by checking on the people targeted. Ask how you can help and share resources for advocacy groups and reporting;
• Document: “I’m recording this.” It can be really helpful to record an incident as it happens, but there are a number of things to keep in mind to safely and responsibly document harassment. Assess the situation. Is anyone helping the person being harassed? If not, use one of the four steps above. If someone else is already helping, assess your own safety. If you are safe, start recording and keep the following tips in mind:
• Keep a safe distance from the incident, make your video easy to verify by including landmarks like a street sign, clearly state the date and time on the video, and always ask the person harassed what they would like to do with the recording.
• Never livestream the video or post it online without the person’s permission. Using a video without consent can make the person targeted feel more powerless.

Adapted from the Southern Poverty Law Center

The Chicago Principles:

Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expressions from the University of Chicago: The Chicago Principles.

Guidance For Managing a Political Climate

Guidelines to assist staff in a challenging political climate

Free Speech on Campus by Edwin Chemerinsky and Howard Gilman

Excerpt from Chapter 5 : What Campus Can and Can’t Do

• “A campus can’t censor or punish speech nearly because a person or a group considers it offensive or hateful.
• A campus can censor or punish speech that meets legal criteria for harassment, True threats, or other speech acts unprotected by the first amendment.(such as destruction of property or disruption of classes and campus activities)
•  A campus can’t prevent protesters from having a meaningful opportunity to get their views across in an effective way.
• A campus can impose time, place and manner restrictions on protests for the purpose of preventing protesters from disrupting the normal work of the campus, including the educational environment and administrative operations.

• A campus can’t impose content based speech restrictions in dormitories.
• A campus can impose content neutral restrictions in dormitories design to ensure a supportive living environment for students.

• A campus can’t censor or punish some speakers, but not others, for putting up handbills writing messages in chalk, or engaging in similar acts of expression.
• A campus can create general content neutral regulations governing on campus expression.

• The campus can’t engage in content based discrimination against faculty, students, or other speakers or writers who seek to express themselves outside the professional context.
• A campus can engage in content-based evaluation of faculty and students who are operating within the professional educational context, as long as this evaluation is based on professional standards or peer assessments of the quality of scholarship or teaching.

• Faculty members may choose to revise students' warnings before presenting material that might be offensive or upsetting to them.
• Colleges and universities should not impose requirements that faculty provide “trigger warnings“ before presenting or assigning material that might be offensive or upsetting to students.

• Campuses can create “safe spaces“ in educational settings that ensure that individuals feel free to express the whitest array of viewpoints, and can support student efforts to self organize in ways that reflect shared interests and experiences.
• Campuses can’t use the concept of “safe spaces“ to censor the expression of ideas considered too offensive for students to hear.

• The campus can’t prohibit students or faculty from using words that some consider to be examples of “microaggressions“.
• A campus can sensitize students and faculty to the impact that certain words may have as  part of an effort to create a respectful work and learning environment.

• A campus can ensure that all student organizations, as a condition for recognition and receipt of funding, be open to all students and can impose sanctions on student organizations for conduct if it is not protected by the principles of freedom of speech.
• The campus cannot deny recognition to a student organization or impose sanctions against it for the views or ideas expressed by the organization, its members or its speakers. 

• Colleges and universities can punish speech over the Internet and social media that otherwise is not protected such as true threats and harassment or speech inconsistent with professional standards.
• Colleges and universities can’t punish speech over the Internet on the grounds that it's offensive. 

• A campus should expect university administrators to speak out against especially egregious speech acts and, most important, encourage the university community to make its own decisions about what speech acts deserve praise or condemnation.
• A campus should not expect the university administrators to comment on or condemn every campus speech act that some person finds offensive.”

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's mission is to defend and sustain the individual rights of students and faculty members at America’s colleges and universities. These rights include freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience — the essential qualities of liberty.

Michigan Tech Free Speech And Elections Policy Review Webinar