Stanford President Gerhard Casper has reluctantly decided not to appeal a court decision which threw out Stanford's prohibition of hate speech and intimidation.
Casper, a former law school dean and constitutional law scholar, was clearly disappointed last week when he announced to the Faculty Senate that Stanford will let stand a Santa Clara County Superior Court ruling that the Grey Interpretation of the university's student conduct code was unconstitutional.
The court ruling was based in part on a 1992 state law that prohibits private universities from limiting free speech.
But, ironically for Stanford, the court ruling also said that Stanford's conduct code section against hate speech was discriminatory because it didn't include all hate speech.
The section, called the Grey Interpretation, singles out hate words and verbal harassment based on sex, race, color, handicap, religion, sexual orientation or national origin.
"The Grey Interpretation did not venture into political fighting words," Casper explained. "So we were accused of being under-inclusive."
The Grey Interpretation was adopted by the university in 1990 following 18 months of debate on campus over whether such prohibitions were proper. As Casper pointed out last week, there has always been ambivalence on campus about the speech restrictions, including from former President Donald Kennedy.
In the end, Casper listened to legal advisers who told him that Stanford's chances of winning an appeal were not good, thanks to the 1992 state law, which was passed after the university adopted the Grey Interpretation.
Given the back-and-forth debate over the Grey Interpretation, no student has ever been disciplined under its provisions.
In the end, the court decision isn't likely to have a great impact on the campus, but the point of principle was a difficult one for the university to give up.
"The decision is not going to unleash torrents of hate speech at Stanford," Casper said. "And harassment, whether accompanied by speech or not, including harassment that is motivated by racial or other bigotry, continues to be in violation of the Fundamental Standard.
"As I have said, we have never had to use the (Grey Interpretation). Harassment, threats or intimidation continue to be unacceptable. Should they go beyond what is protected by law, we will invoke university disciplinary procedures. Otherwise, we shall continue to do what we always have done. We will counter prejudice with reason."
--Don Kazak
"We shall continue to do what we always have done. We will counter prejudice with reason." @id:--Gerhard Casper
Back up to the Table of Contents Page