Sonoma State Star

Issue date: 3/4/08 Section: News

Media Credit: Ed Troxell Both the U.S. Army and protestors were allowed to practice their right to free speech at WOW. [Click to enlarge]

Media Credit: Ed Troxell Despite free speech issues, WOW allowed many students to meet and greet with future employers. [Click to enlarge]

What started out as a request to protest the U.S. Military's involvement in Feb. 28 World of Work (WOW) job fair, blossomed into a full fledge dispute over the U.S. first amendment, prompting students, faculty and civilians to fight for their constitutional rights.
"[The Career Center] claims it's not a public event. It's for students and faculty only, and that employers are paying to come there... therefore they say it's exempt from free speech," said Peter Philips, Professor of Sociology.
The conflict actually started last year when the WOW fair was moved indoors. This year it was held inside the Recreational Center, which only is accessible by faculty and students. Employers that had rented a space were allowed to enter as well.
In addition, before entering the WOW each attendee was required to sign-in and take a Code of Conduct handout. According to Chuck Rhodes, SSU Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs and Enrollment Management, this code was "adapted from one used by another California State University."
The handout, which had to be presented before entering, was a citation from the Title 5 Code 45301 of Regulations. According to this code, an outlawed behavior on the list of inappropriate behavior is the distribution of flyers or handbills by guests inside the building.
Protesters of previous years produced different results, which one protestor said was a result of having these rules sprung on them last year.
This year was a bit different.
While literature was always allowed to be passed outside of the Recreation Center, initially, it was not allowed to be distributed indoors. Because of this discrepancy, Philips sent numerous email appeals to Chuck Rhodes.
An email sent by Philips on Feb. 22 delivered his opinions on freedom of speech and the military presence.
"For over a decade SSU students and faculty have peacefully protested military recruiters presence on campus by handing out information flyers, holding signs, and demonstrating in various fashions," said Philips in the email.
Rhodes responded after discussing the situation with the General Council for SSU, whose job it is to help with legal questions. The initial conclusion was that prohibiting the literature to be distributed indoors would not infringe anyone's first amendment rights.
"It is problematic in terms of the potential erosion of first you're not allowed inside, but you're allowed outside. What happens when the decision is that outside is too destructive," said Sociology professor Andy Roth. "What happens when you need to be somewhere on the other side of campus where in affect you can exercise your free speech rights, but they are rendered essentially meaningless because there's no one to address."
In response Philips and fellow SSU professor Rick Luttmann headed the group "SSU Emergency Committee for Free Speech" (ECFS).
"Where on campus does freedom of speech not apply?" asked Philips at an ECFS meeting on Feb. 26. "Time place restrictions can exist, but in this case not allowing fliers to be handed out when it's totally conducive to the activities that are on going is clearly a prior restraint on freedom of speech."
Philips sentiment was shared with almost all in attendance. At one point, members even began strategizing ideas such as pins, buttons and leaflets posted onto shirts.
However creative and original these ideas were, they would prove to be unnecessary in the days to come.
On Feb. 27 Rhodes wrote back, fulfilling his promise to look into the matter further. After reviewing the circumstances with the General Council, a new interpretation was made. All participants of WOW were allowed to hand out literature inside of the Rec Center as well, provided that it did not interfere or disrupt with employers.
"The revision in his response was very technical and overall, the original process undertaken by Career Services is sound," said Rhodes in an email. "It was the desire of the staff in Career Services to provide guidelines that enhance the environment for the World of Work."
Philips seemed to be content.
"It was a real victory for free speech this week at SSU. Civil right must be acted on in order to be maintained," said Philips.
"It was a good win because for the last few years we've been battling," said member of ECFS Nelson Caldaron, a student at SSU and assistant with "Project Censored."
"We mobilized together. We had an emergency meeting. Basically what we were trying to do was get us motivated and organized so we could fight this whole ordeal, which we did," added Caldaron.
What started as an anti-military protest, transformed into a civil rights debate. With the dispute over free speech settled, protestors returned to the origin of their objections.
"The Solomon Amendment basically blackmails us into letting [military recruiters] come onto campus," said Luttmann, during a Feb. 26 meeting.
As it exists today, the Solomon Amendment gives the Secretary of Defense power to deny any higher education school's federal grant in the case of their prevention of military recruitment.
The main issue with military recruiters is that they will screen people out due to their sexual orientation. Though an individual may never be forced to state their sexual orientation, the rule does not stay consistent with SSU's non-discrimination policy.
"Sonoma State University and its auxiliary organizations (herein referred to as the University) support an environment free of unlawful discrimination in any of the University's programs or activities of education and employment," states the policy, effective June 2007. "Accordingly, discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex (including sexual harassment and sexual assault), sexual orientation, marital status, pregnancy, age, disability, medical condition and covered veteran status is prohibited."
"The original reason we were concerned many years ago was because of [the U.S. Military's] anti-gay policy," said Luttmann. "The interesting thing about that is that we [were] essentially saying we don't like it that you won't even consider even accepting certain people who might want to be in the military."
Though the debate overmilitary recruitment is always recurring, most recently SSU was torn over the Ron Longsdon Basketball Classic funding last semester. This was a result of the Academic Senate's condemning the use of U.S. Army funding for the tournament.
"The CSU would lose money from the military not being there," said SSU Senior Kari Whalen. "Fundamentally what SSU has done is say that they choose money, and they choose army recruitment, over the freedoms of the students in this institution."
Philips, Luttman and Caldaron were a few of the protesters handing out buttons, painting posters and distributing literature in and outdoors.
The two variations of literature they handed out were bright blue, with bold lettering. The first was titled, "Silence in the Barracks," and listed female sexual abuse statistics, provided by the magazine "In These Times."
One statistic was that 28 percent of female veterans have been sexually abused while on active duty.
The second was titled, "Advice From Veterans," which contained three messages cautioning civilians away from trusting recruiters.
When Philips handed the fliers to several of the Army soldiers at the U.S. Army stand, each took the papers and gladly read them. There was not even a hint of animosity from either side.
The only official comment an Army soldier gave was from Captain Dennis Faulkner, who explained that in his personal experience, he has not seen any of what the abuse literature explains.
"The army is here to protect the nation, and to protect the constitution," said Faulkner. "Through the rights that we all enjoy is the freedom of speech and the freedom to demonstrate, and we are absolutely pleased to defend the rights of all Americans to do that, and that includes here."
The opinions of those in attendance varied on the subject of Army recruitment.
"I think that people are old enough to make the decision if they're going to go into the military or not," said SSU Freshmen Nicole Curtin. "It's not like these are five-year-old kids running in there and being persuaded. The military's just standing there, and it's a job also, it could be a career."
SSU Sophomore Luke Haley had a different approach.
"If this is true, than it's pretty shocking that women are being abused and mistreated in the military. I don't think that should be happening," said Haley. "Within the regular workforce too I think we have the same problem with women being mistreated. I think all together as whole we should stop and not just pick [on the army]."
Despite the debate which took place prior to the WOW event, the day went by almost incident free. The only person who was escorted out had no association with the event, meaning he was not a student, faculty or employer. That same man continued his protesting once outside.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools