Table of Contents
Free Speech at Pomona College? Let’s Talk about It
![](/sites/default/files/styles/379x213/public/2017/06/23141315/FIRE-Logo-slider-2.jpg?h=a02a2f07&itok=NO5R_5Za)
We like to say at FIRE that a great outcome of controversial speech is more speech. And that’s just what Pomona College is up to.
In early November, the Pomona Student Union (PSU) organized an immigration debate between Jacob Hornberger, founder of the Future of Freedom Foundation, and Marvin Stewart, president of the Minuteman Project, Inc. PSU president Halsey Jakle told The Student Life News that the organizers intentionally chose speakers with unpopular views with the goal of stimulating discussion and raising campus awareness of the issues involved.
That’s just what happened. Following the event, which proceeded smoothly until some protesters disrupted the question-and-answer period by chanting, further discussion on the issue was led on November 12 by Pomona professor Fernando Lozano and by student Katie Putnam on November 14.
Then, on November 17, Pomona president David Oxtoby (a man I know and respect) requested that the Executive Committee of the Faculty lead a discussion of what to do in the case of controversial events. Explicitly on the table is Pomona’s policy about intervening to cancel events when there is “a broad consensus that the message falls under commonly understood definitions of ‘hate speech.’” As his letter to the Pomona community stated,
Faculty, students, and staff have raised real and appropriate questions about the limits to free speech on our campus and about the kinds of expression that should be defined as “hate speech.” I welcome discussion of these issues. It is the current policy of the college that we would not intervene to cancel an event sponsored by a campus department, program, or organization unless there was a demonstrable threat to the physical safety of members of our community or a broad consensus that the message falls under commonly understood definitions of “hate speech.”
FIRE wrote President Oxtoby on November 29 about the possible further restrictions on free speech at Pomona. We reminded him of Pomona’s stated commitment to free speechin the Student Handbook, his own ringing endorsement of free speech in a convocation address, and the endorsement of free speech by Pomona Board of Trustees member John Payton in a commencement address.
In response, President Oxtoby wrote FIRE on December 10, again reaffirming Pomona’s traditions of free speech, free inquiry, and academic freedom.
It is now up to the Executive Committee of the Faculty to take the next step. Maybe free speech will be curtailed—as the “hate speech” policy already seems to do—or maybe the committee will again reaffirm Pomona’s historic commitments.
Of course, FIRE has no interest in a university placing prior restraint on discussions of university policy. FIRE would object, however, to any outcome of such discussions that would chill or restrict the right to freedom of speech enjoyed by members of the Pomona community and their guests. As destructive as “hate speech” might seem to the values expressed by a broad consensus of persons at Pomona, even this speech is and must be protected under the First Amendment, which Pomona, even though it is a private college, regards very highly. Besides, relying on a broad-consensus standard, as stated in President Oxtoby’s November 17 letter, clearly marginalizes the minority view, which is particularly endangered in the case of controversial speech. And it is hardly practical to conduct a referendum of the entire college community on such matters.
I hope that the Faculty Executive Committee discussions regarding these matters are characterized by Pomona’s best free speech traditions and that these discussions lead to a reaffirmation, both in words and in policy, of the principles on which President Oxtoby and I largely agree.
Recent Articles
FIRE’s award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.
![Jeff Hunt wearing "Pro Life U" sweatshirt](/sites/default/files/styles/334x250/public/2024/07/JEFF_HUNT_PROLIFEU_56.jpg?h=17ddf58a&itok=hpIJpeXt)
![TikTok logo behind red bars](/sites/default/files/styles/334x250/public/2024/07/TikTok%20Behind%20bars.jpg?h=def3cf70&itok=BZpDTHZ8)
FIRE brief: TikTok law is unprecedented threat to Americans’ expressive rights
TikTok users and TikTok itself are challenging a new law that singles out and effectively bans an entire communications platform used by millions of Americans.
![The Davidson County Courthouse in Nashville, Tennessee](/sites/default/files/styles/334x250/public/2024/07/Davidson%20County%20Courthouse.jpg?h=1389ae57&itok=Z7-Jbyih)
Getting copyright wrong: Nashville judge cites copyright law to withhold Covenant school shooter’s writings
The public has a right to see the Covenant school shooter’s writings, but a Nashville judge is using copyright law to block a newspaper’s FOIA request.
![UW-La Crosse professor Joe Gow gestures to an audience in an auditorium on campus](/sites/default/files/styles/334x250/public/2024/07/Joe%20Gow.jpg?h=b69f83ed&itok=MRFBCWyC)
The naked truth: University of Wisconsin’s push to fire professor over porn hobby is bad for all faculty
UW-La Crosse’s attempts to oust Joe Gow chill free speech and strike a major blow against tenure.