The CUNY Policy on
Expressive Conduct
Presented by BMCC Academic
Freedom Committee
February 26, 2014
Current CUNY Policy: Henderson
Rules
• “A member of the academic community shall not
intentionally obstruct and/or forcibly prevent
others from the exercise of their rights.”
• “Members of the academic community and other
persons on the college grounds, shall not use
language or take actions reasonably likely to
provoke or encourage physical violence by
demonstrators, those demonstrated against or
spectators.”
Proposed Policy: Time, Place and
Pre-approval
• “CUNY has the right to establish reasonable
time, place and manner restrictions on
expressive activities.” 10/11/13 CUNY Draft
• “Sponsors of a planned demonstration must
give notice of the location, date and time to the
Director of Public Safety or designee at least 24
hours in advance of the demonstration if they
are requesting sound amplification.” 10/11/13 CUNY
Draft
Freedom of Expression VS.
Academic Freedom
• “This right [Academic Freedom] differs from the
Constitutional right to freedom of speech and
assembly guaranteed by the First Amendment in
the sense that it is the necessary condition for a
faculty member to fulfill his/her professional
obligations and responsibilities as a teacher,
researcher, and writer. It is also meant to protect
faculty members from reprisal for exercising their
free speech rights.” BMCC Academic Freedom Manual
Rationale for Policy Change
• “… However, demonstrations, leafleting,
tabling and other forms of expressive conduct
must be carried out so as to ensure the safety
of individuals, the protection of property, and
the continuity of the University’s educational
activities and business operations.” 10/11/13
CUNY Draft
• “undifferentiated fear or apprehension of a
disturbance is not enough to overcome the
right to freedom of expression on a college
campus.” Healy Case, Supreme Court 1972
“Compelling Interest”
No Free-Speech Zones Defeated: U. of Cincinnati, West Virginia U., Nevada
at Reno, UNC Greensboro, Citrus College, Texas Tech, etc.
• “Defendants shall revise the student speech
policies to craft more narrowly tailored regulations
that regulate student expressive activities in
designated public fora only as are necessary to
serve a compelling government interest; and
Defendants may impose content-neutral time, place,
or manner restrictions in such a way so as not to
burden substantially more speech than is
necessary to serve a compelling University
interest.” Timothy S. Black United States District Judge, June 12,
2012