CAMPUS

Pomona Apologizes For Trampling Student Rights

Pomona college has apologized for and reversed its embarrassing decision to ban two students from campus for allegedly “disrupting” a public discussion on abortion. In truth, the students merely videotaped the meeting and asked questions, but two Pomona deans summarily decided that their actions constituted intimidation and harassment. In addition to being banned from campus, the students were also warned that they might be charged with invasion of privacy and were ordered to hand over their videotape.

Of course, this is all absurd, and it didn’t take long for Pomona to realize it was facing a PR disaster. As FIRE notes (see link above), this victory is in large part due to the writing of Charles Johnson, a member of the Collegiate Network:

This case was broken wide open by Charles Johnson of the blog Claremont Conservative, who pointed out that the February 19, 2009, lecture was publicly advertised and that the students had ceased videotaping the event when asked to do so, contrary to official reports.  Johnson also noted that Pomona College had taken no similar action against truly disruptive events on campus in recent years.

Kudos to Johnson and the rest of the crew at the Claremont Conservative and Claremont Independent. This is the kind of watchdog journalism that makes independent college publications so vital.

Unfortunately, the actions at Pomona, while extreme, are not an isolated case. One of the growing trends at college campuses, which I’ve witnessed at the University of Oregon, is the idea of “safe space.” (For example, check out the LSU Safe Space Campaign.)

The deans at Pomona explained that the abortion discussion was “an opportunity for students from across the Claremont Colleges to learn about deeply personal narratives regarding the experience of abortion … in a supportive and safe space.” The deans then wrote that by questioning the presenters, the students were “attempting to create an antagonistic space,” “intimidate participants,” and “chill the free exchange of ideas.”

From what I can discern, a “safe space” is simply a place where no one disagrees with you. And while there is nothing wrong with having supportive place where minority groups can gather, applying this kind of idea to public forums and public spaces is simply not in line with the spirit of the First Amendment.