U-M Tickets Student Protesters and Bans Them From Campus Buildings: ACLU Says, “Not So Fast”

by Ann Mullen

According to an article in The Michigan Daily on Mar. 29, Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (SAFE) reported that three students were served citations by police in Ann Arbor “for trespassing at the 101st Honor Convocation when a protest disrupted the event at Hill Auditorium Sunday.”

The new “disruptive activity policy,” threatens students with expulsion and threatens faculty and staff with termination for actions deemed disruptive to “normal celebrations, activities, and operations of the University.” The new policy was put into place by the Regents in response to the shutdown of the Honors Convocation held March 24 at Hill Auditorium. Student protesters waved signs and shouted against the war in Gaza. The students protested what they believe is the complicity of the university in the war in Gaza, triggered by an Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas terrorists who entered Israel. On Oct, 7, members of Hamas, aided by Gazans, kidnapped over 200 people. Terrorists from Hamas and Gazans raped, tortured and murdered Israelis during the Oct. 7 attack. News organizations worldwide have confirmed the ongoing use of sexual torture of the kidnapped civilians by Hamas terrorists holding the civilians.

The student protesters interrupted a convocation speech by U-M President Santa Ono.

On Apr. 3, 2024, the ACLU of Michigan sent a letter to the University of Michigan expressing concern over its ‘Disruptive Activity Policy,’ urging the University to either abandon the proposed policy or substantially re-write it. The letter, which is addressed to university President Santa J. Ono and Vice President and General Counsel Timothy Lynch, describes the proposed policy as vague and overbroad, and risks chilling free speech expression on campus.

The letter also details how the proposed policy’s ambiguous language can result in discriminatory enforcement, which could include targeting those whose speech is unpopular, controversial, or critical of university officials. The vagueness of the policy can also lead to racial disparities in student discipline and campus policing.

While the letter acknowledges that the University has an interest in carrying out its operations without major disruptions, it warns that the proposed policy would unnecessarily limit civil liberties, particularly the right of free speech and protest. The letter also questions why the policy is needed given that the University already has policies that respect freedom of expression while providing relatively clear guidance about what is prohibited at various campus events.

Lastly, the letter criticizes the policy as unnecessarily punitive, threatening violators with expulsion and even referrals for criminal charges.

“In sum, the proposed Disruptive Activity Policy is vague and overbroad, it fails to make important distinctions that would prevent predictable First Amendment violations, and if adopted in its current form the policy risks chilling a substantial amount of constitutionally protected speech and expression on campus,” the letter states. “We urge the University to cure these errors through a substantial rewriting of the policy… [or] reconsider whether adopting this policy is even necessary in light of relevant existing policies and procedures.”

The ACLU’s letter may be read here: https://www.aclumich.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/letter_to_um_re_disruptive_activity_policy.pdf