October 9, 2008

Students' Punishment Lifted at U. of Texas

Cross-posted from Campaign U.

Following protests and cries of free-speech violations, the University of Texas at Austin lifted a punishment imposed on Wednesday on two students who had refused to remove signs supporting Barack Obama from their dormitory window.

A university disciplinary board had told the students they would not be able to register for classes after violating a university policy banning all signs posted in residence halls.

In a written statement today, William C. Powers Jr., the university’s president, said, “Effective immediately, I am suspending the prohibition on signs in individual students’ residence-hall room windows and any sanctions related to its enforcement.”

Mr. Powers said the university had formed a committee to examine the policy, but that, for now, all signs would be allowed. —Reeves Wiedeman

Comments

1. Good.

   — American Student    Oct 10, 08:37 AM    #

2. As a died-in-the-wool liberal and staunch Obama supporter, I have to agree with the university rule to keep a public space, such as the window of a dorm room, free from the exhibition of personal sentiment. Such displays do not constitute a discourse; they only gratify the ego of the displayer. The same goes for polluting the public space with religious signs and symbols.

   — Faridoun Farrokh    Oct 10, 09:34 AM    #

3. The prohibition may not have been content directed but style directed. When back in 2001 mine and another department moved into a renovated building, the “Style Police” on campus wanted to impose a rule that all windows’ blinds should be kept at the same height and open about the same width. Of course it didnt fly. But there are always people around a university who will choose style over substance, even when they know the difference.

   — Joseph F Foster    Oct 10, 09:41 AM    #

4. I used to work at a place that had the same policy, but it was directed at neon beer signs – the college didn’t want to advertise for free, but also didn’t want that image to be the one thing you could see from the road. That kind of policy could easilty spill into “all signs” to make it easier for students and administrators to manage.

   It seems, sometimes, like all policies lead back to alcohol abuse. I wish we could get a handle on that as a society.

   — freedom/policies    Oct 10, 09:51 AM    #

5. I agree with #2. I’m an Obama suppporter, but signs in windows can overtake a residence hall and degrade the appearance. And once you permit one with a message that is not offensive, it’s difficult to prohibit others that are. I support the no sign in the window policy.

   — Jim    Oct 10, 10:21 AM    #

6. Signs in dorm windows are on a par with leaflets in the quad. Some anti-democratic forces will claim that campaign buttons on people’s clothing and fliers passed out violate good taste, aesthetic codes, university neutrality, taxpayer’s rights over their property, blah blah blah. They will never just state what they really think: that democracy is secondary to decorum.

   — David McCullough    Oct 10, 10:59 AM    #

7. Cripes—it’s a college residence hall, fer cryin’ out loud! Signs in the windows seem like a great opportunity for students to express themselves and perhaps learn about how free speech works. Who expects students to live in a sterile, impersonal environment? (In response to #5, neon and other lighted signs can and should be banned on health and safety grounds.)

   — B Petrulis    Oct 10, 11:07 AM    #

8. I have to agree with B Petrulis; this is where the kids LIVE, after all. They don’t own it, but it’s the only personal space they have while they are in school. Geez, let them decorate it and express themselves. Are Texas’ dorms that nice that they can’t take a little personalization. If so, they’d be the first ones I’ve heard of to meet that standard…also not someplace that I’d want to live.

   — Ginger    Oct 10, 11:48 AM    #

9. #7 Mr. McCullough…

   Democracy is not a Synonym for using university property for marketing.

   Democracy is also not a synonym for unfettered communication (what purists call “free” speech)

   #10’s argument is far more valid, though i agree with the general sentiment that a sign ban is not inapporpriate.

   — David    Oct 10, 12:15 PM    #

10. Maybe I’m missing something, but don’t these students or their parents pay for these dorm rooms? Does that not give them the right to display whatever they want in the windows, just as I could in the place I currently rent, so long as it is not hateful or obscene?

    — GW    Oct 10, 12:49 PM    #

11. #11, so, can students do anything in that room since they or their parents are paying for it? What are the limitations, if any? What about those whose payments are made via the taxpayer through grants?

    — Cicero    Oct 10, 01:40 PM    #

12. #12, yes, students paying rent for dorm rooms ought to enjoy the same basic rights as students paying rent for other apartments. Students whose room and board is paid via the taxpayer should be in the same situation as any other public servant, and I doubt you would suggest that you local mail carrier should be banned from displaying signs in windows.

    — GW    Oct 10, 02:10 PM    #

13. As someone on the UT campus, I think it’s bizarre that the policy has been going on as long as it has. There’s a Law School on campus, for goodness sakes, and President Powers is a lawyer. Who would’ve guessed that the students would go along with it for so long willingly?

    — Whatever!    Oct 10, 02:57 PM    #

Previous: NCAA to Athletes: In Tough Times, Travel Cheaply
Next: Bus Carrying Thai Students and Faculty Members Crashes, Killing at Least 21