UA voices support for speech code

The Undergraduate Assembly voted last night to ask Interim President Claire Fagin not to suspend the University's speech code until the administration comes up with an "alternative and comprehensive" plan to replace it. Last week, Fagin said she was considering suspending Part II of the University's racial harassment policy which forbids any "verbal or symbolic behavior" that "insults or demeans [a] person . . . on the basis of his or her race, color, ethnicity or national origin . . . by the use of slurs, epithets, hate words, demeaning jokes or derogatory stereotypes." The resolution, submitted by UA Vice Chairperson Scott Sher, calls on Fagin to "develop and enact alternative and comprehensive plans to deal with the lack of respect and tolerance on our campus." The resolution, which is written in the form of an open letter to Fagin, states that merely revoking Part II would not deal with "the pervasive problems" facing the University. Many students, the resolution states, feel the speech code offers some protection from discrimination and harassment. In addition, the letter reaffirms the UA's commitment to work with students, faculty and administrators to improve the community and asks for a meeting with Fagin, Interim Provost Marvin Lazerson and other administrators. The proposal barely squeaked by after UA Chairperson Seth Hamalian cast the deciding "yes" vote to break a 12-12 tie. UA representative Dan Debicella spoke out against the resolution, citing what he termed the speech code's unconstitutionality. He also said that Part III of the harassment policy, which deals with actions as opposed to words, already safeguards many minorities. But UA member Rashad Ibrahim questioned the maturity of the University's student population and emphasized the need for speech guidelines. "Some people have no respect for others," he said. "It's bullshit for us to sit up here and talk about freedom of expression – fuck that shit." Sher, a College senior, said his resolution gave the UA flexibility to deal with a variety of situations, after gauging the pulse of the student body. Sher's resolution was seen by many UA members as diametrically opposed to one introduced by College junior Debicella, which asked Fagin to revoke the speech code. After the assembly passed Sher's resolution, Hamalian tried to move on without debating Debicella's proposal on the grounds that it contradicted the previous resolution. Debicella immediately protested and asked that the UA debate his proposal "out of respect for [him] as a UA member." After some discussion, Hamalian relented and the resolution was debated and voted down, because, several representatives said, passing both would send a "mixed message" to the University community.