Editorial: Putting Speech On Trial

The changes call for punishment of any persons involved in a case other than the accused who discuss the case in public. Judicial proceedings against members of the University community should not be considered "educational records" and therefore should not fall under the confidentiality provisions of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974. In the real world, most judicial proceedings are public record and open to public scrutiny. Certainly, the University's judicial system should not mimic the public courts in all respects. But public review of the judicial process should be a value upheld in any reformation of the system. Furthermore, much of the deterrence value in the judicial system rests in the public disclosure of punishments for violations of University policy. Beyond these issues, the proposed changes would walk all over the First Amendment. Such a restriction would also go against the spirit of the proposed version of the Guidelines for Open Expression. Is or is not the University going to be "vigilant to ensure the continuing openness and effectiveness of channels of communication among members of the University community on questions of common interest"? As the Guidelines also state, "In case of conflict between the principles of the Guidelines on Open Expression and other University policies, the principles of the Guidelines shall take precedence."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.