Students in Opposition to the "Proposed Policy on Hate and Extremist Groups"

The “Proposed Policy on Hate and Extremist Groups” confronts the GW Law community with a challenging question: how strongly do we support the idea of a free, open, and robust exchange of ideas.

It is easy to support free speech when it is not challenging, when it is not offensive, when it is agreeable. But we test our commitment to principle when speech is most provocative, when it offends us, and when it challenges us. There is no question the incident leading to this proposal was deplorable: no student should ever feel threatened or unsafe on campus. But as deplorable as that incident was, the appropriate response is not to restrict speech on campus, but rather to ensure that all views are zealously, but politely, expressed.

First, the proposed policy would have an immense chilling effect on speech at GW Law. The proposed policy would: (1) require that all speakers from designated groups have a verbal disclaimer before any event that their invited speakers were from a designated hate or extremist group (as determined by the ADL or SPLC); (2) include the same disclaimer on all advertisements for the event, and (3) require that every student organization pay - from their organization’s funds - for at least two university police officers as security for their events. The effect on open and robust debate at GW will be dramatic.

The GW Law community should accommodate all perspectives, and all speakers, for without free participation in the marketplace of ideas, we all lose. Indeed, this incident took place at an event hosted by Dean Alan Morrison. An event designed to include all perspectives on a controversial topic in our society. Steps should be taken to ensure that all debates are respectful, that no speaker who threatens a student is re-invited to GW Law. But this proposal is not the proper approach. It will unacceptably chill speech and academic freedom at GW Law.

We ask you, the Faculty of GW Law, to oppose this policy.