New student code of conduct will not punish racial epithets

The new Code of Student Conduct, recommended by former interim Provost Marvin Lazerson, was approved by former interim President Claire Fagin and became effective July 1. The code replaces the Code of General Conduct and the Racial Harassment Policy, Part II of which is commonly called the "speech code." "I think that I would call it a minimalist code in a sense, in that I think it says what has to be said without going into the kinds of detail that are not only excessive but are also misleading and can eventually be misconstrued," Fagin said this summer. The final edition of the code -- two previous editions were published in issues of the Almanac for comment -- outlines the "Rights of Student Citizenship" and the "Responsibilities of Student Citizenship." Among each student's "rights" are "the right to freedom of thought and expression" and "the right to be free from discrimination." But the most striking change from the old Racial Harassment Policy appears in section (d) of the students' "Responsibilities" section. "The University condemns hate speech, epithets, and racial, ethnic, sexual and religious slurs," the code reads. "However, the content of student speech or expression is not by itself a basis for disciplinary action." But it goes on to state that "student speech may be subject to discipline when it violates applicable laws or University regulations or policies." The old Racial Harassment Policy stated that "no member of the University community may engage in racial harassment, regardless of time or place." Fagin said she received many complaints about a sentence in an earlier version of the code which added that "patterns of student speech or expression may constitute conduct, and as such, they may be subject to discipline." That passage was finally deleted from the code. The new Code is based on recommendations from the faculty and student Judicial Revision Oversight Committee, comments from members of the University community and General Counsel, and changes made by Lazerson. "I felt very, very strongly about the students who participated in this and presented it," Fagin said. "I think that?to go beyond the students' opinions would not have been keeping with what we have been trying to do this year." The new code received mixed reaction from students and faculty on campus over the summer. College senior and Undergraduate Assembly member Dan Schorr – who last year founded an organization known as the First Amendment Task Force to abolish the so-called "speech code" – said he is pleased with the new policy. "I think it's a good solution to the debate that's been raging over the past few years at Penn," he said. "For the most part it will protect freedom of speech on campus, while still addressing the concerns of civility." Committee on Strengthening the Community Chairperson Gloria Chisum agreed. "It's a very good statement [that is] consistent with what the Commission?recommended," she said. History Professor Alan Kors also praised the University for "an honest attempt to abolish the speech code," but he said the new code could still use changes. "It desperately needs an equal protection clause," he said. "No one [should] be prosecuted for any offense that would be tolerated from another member of the community." Kors said the inclusion of such a clause would "ensure the abolition of the single most frightening aspect, morally, of the prior code -- which was its double standard." In addition, Kors said part III (d) of the code is unnecessarily vague, giving it a "potential for abuse." Bob Schoenberg, coordinator for the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Community at Penn program, said reaction in the gay community is varied. "The lesbian, gay, bisexual community is not of one mind politically," he said. "There are people who have the strong conviction that speech per se can be hurtful and should be punishable, and others who believe that despite the fact that there are names they are called which are hurtful to them, that others have the right to speak freely." College junior Eden Jacobowitz -- who was charged under the old Racial Harassment Policy for yelling "water buffalo" at five black women in 1993 -- said the University could have solved the speech code debate in one sentence. "Basically the school should just say, 'students at the University of Pennsylvania have the same rights as people everywhere else in the United States," he said.