Dang is vice president external of the Graduate Student Association. Burch is chair of the University of California Students Association.
By Alain Dang and Kenny Burch
On March 22, college campuses across the nation will mark the second anniversary of the unanimous Supreme Court decision in University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth. The decision serves as a victory for campus free speech and expressive student activities by claiming that an active marketplace of ideas (through mandatory student fees) is an integral part of the college educational experience.
The two-year-old decision makes two key conclusions. First, the decision upholds the role of mandatory student fees as both appropriate and constitutional to fund a broad range of student activities that offer a competition of ideas and furthers the university’s educational mission.
Second, the Supreme Court stipulated that a constitutional funding process must make allocations without consideration of a particular organization’s viewpoint, which has been deemed “viewpoint neutrality.”
The court reaffirms that student activities have significant educational value. A wide variety of cultural, political, religious and ethnic activity comes from the campus community, including cultural festivals, service events, musical performances and political rallies. Once the university has decided that a program of student activities is beneficial, the court is quite clear that there can be few, if any, restrictions on the various activities that are funded.
Justice Kennedy recognizes the “vast, unexplored bounds” open to student activities and language from the Court’s opinion reveals just how broad the program of student activities funding should be:
“The speech the University seeks to encourage in the program before us is distinguished not by its discernible limits but by its vast, unexplored bounds.... The University may well determine that it’s mission is well served if students have the means to engage in dynamic discussions of philosophical, religious, scientific, social and political subjects outside the lecture hall…. We make no distinction between campus activities and off-campus activities.... Universities possess significant interests in encouraging students to take advantage of the social, civic, cultural and religious opportunities available in the surrounding communities and throughout the country.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has given campuses a green light to cultivate an exciting range of educational activities, both on and off campus, through student fee funding. In fact, the Court wrote, “If the rule of viewpoint neutrality is respected, our holding affords the University latitude to adjust its extracurricular student speech program to accommodate these advances and opportunities.”
Some confusion has resulted over the court’s use of the term “viewpoint neutrality.” The viewpoint neutrality requirement is to ensure that activities and organizations are funded through a consistent process accessible to all organizations. This ensures, for example, that the pro-choice group on campus cannot be denied funding simply because the university or the student government are more sympathetic to the pro-life viewpoint. The same goes for a pro-life group at a school with pro-choice leadership.
The key point to remember is that the phrase “viewpoint neutrality” pertains to the process by which funds are distributed, not the outcome. A viewpoint neutral decision process will yield differing levels of funding to different groups.
Now, as we mark the second anniversary of the Southworth decision, the UC system is working to revise our systemwide student fee policies. The University of California Student Association has submitted a revised policy that takes full advantage of the Supreme Court’s ruling and revolves around three basic principles for funding student groups and activities: 1) Allows funding of all activities that are consistent with the University’s educational mission; 2) Maintains the historical role of student governments in allocating fee funds; 3) Retains the viewpoint neutral system of allocating funds, with the understanding that no funding decision can be based upon the views of the group; funding may not be solely contingent upon demonstrating majority support, and funding levels may be significantly different for different groups, but differences cannot be because of the views expressed by any of the groups.
These principles have been deemed legal and consistent with Southworth by the Legislative Counsel of California and endorsed by a variety of state legislators. These principles will allow full student participation in the vast “marketplace of ideas” that the Supreme Court upholds and protects. It is critical that the University of California Office of the President accepts these principles and keeps students involved in every step of the revision process.
If you are interested in finding out more information about this issue, contact your local student government or go to www.ucsa.org.