Free Speech, Civil Discourse and Peaceful Assembly

A vital academic climate requires, and thus the university protects and promotes, the exchange of ideas and search for truth. SUNY Oswego respects and fulfills the guarantees of free speech under the U.S. Constitution. To that end, we support assembly, debate, and discourse outside of the classroom on all manner of issues. Members of the SUNY Oswego community will have different perspectives and ideas, which may conflict. The university’s role is not to shield people from ideas and opinions with which they disagree or are potentially offensive.

The university’s commitment to free speech stems from its legal obligations, as well as a dedication to an open academic climate. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution affirms, with rare exceptions, the rights of individuals and groups to communicate virtually any idea, regardless of how widely shared or accepted by others it may be. It should be noted, however, that the Constitution does not protect speech constituting threats of violence, incitements to violence, fighting words, obscenity, defamation or fraud. These types of speech, which are generally referred to broadly as “unprotected speech” (or as “exceptions” to the general principle of free speech) are not protected at SUNY Oswego, and may in some cases subject the speaker to some form of appropriate disciplinary action by the university. Speech which does not fall into these narrow exceptions, however, will be considered, and generally referred to here and in the university’s policies referenced below, as “protected speech”.

university policy cannot supersede the federal or state constitutions. In fact, restricting any individual’s or group’s protected speech solely on the basis of it being controversial, upsetting, or even abhorrent, is antithetical to the First Amendment. However, the Constitution does permit organizations like SUNY Oswego to impose narrowly tailored “time, place and manner” restrictions on the making or delivery of protected speech, provided those restrictions are content and viewpoint-neutral and are needed to protect a significant organizational interest. In the case of SUNY Oswego, this means the university can determine the time, place, and manner of speech so as to ensure minimal interference with the operations of the college, its provision of services, and people’s access to its services.

The same legal obligations to provide a safe environment for constitutionally-protected speech also protect the rights of protestors. Community members have the right to respond to a controversial speaker through actions such as talking, circulating literature, displaying signs, and singing. Others might choose to ignore the speaker in order to deny them the attention they seek. The law does not, however, give individuals the right to threaten a speaker, commit any violent act against a speaker, or create a situation in which the speaker cannot be heard. Ultimately, critics cannot silence (through a so-called “heckler’s veto”) the speech of others with which they disagree—no matter how strongly they may disagree.

Ultimately, SUNY Oswego strives to ensure a safe environment for all constitutionally-protected speech, regardless of its content or viewpoint. For this reason, the university will remain a neutral venue and provide the same level of safety and respect to all speakers.

Individuals wishing to exercise their free speech and expression rights at SUNY Oswego must do so consistent with the following State of NY, SUNY and SUNY Oswego policies.

Policies and Resources

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Is controversial speech legal?

Yes, controversial speech is legal, so long as it is Constitutionally protected speech. The Constitutional right to free speech as set forth in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution affirms, with few exceptions (i.e. categories of “unprotected speech” such as threats of violence), the lawfulness of individuals’ and groups’ right to communicate virtually any idea regardless of how widely shared or accepted by others it may be.

2. Can the university restrict speech on campus?

Yes. The university can prohibit and punish “unprotected speech” such as threats of violence. It may also impose reasonable “time, place and manner” limitations on the making or delivery of protected speech so as to ensure minimal interference with the operation of the university, its provision of services, and people’s access to those services.

3. What are time, place and manner restrictions and how do they relate to public forum free speech?

The Supreme Court has said that public entities such as the university have discretion in regulating the “time, place, and manner” of speech. As a public entity, partially funded by NYS tax dollars, the university provides a designated public forum to third parties for their exercise of free speech rights. To comply with existing law, the university recognizes that it will be dedicating its scarce resources to third parties, including staff time for the management of the designated public forum, the cost associated/loss of revenue with the use of space itself, and possibly utilizing university Police and other administrative offices' staff, to provide for the public safety of participants.

The university weighs its competing obligations and responsibilities: To meet its educational mission, to meet its legal obligations as a public entity to provide a designated public forum for free speech by third parties, to meet its audit and control obligations in managing NYS property under its jurisdiction, and to meet its obligations for the orderly and safe operation of its campus, while responsibly managing and allocating its scarce resources in pursuit of its educational mission for its students.

4. Can the university restrict speech because it is controversial?

No, not if the speech is Constitutionally protected speech. University policy may not supersede the Constitution. Moreover, restricting any individual’s or group’s protected speech solely on the basis of it being upsetting, or even demonstrably wrong, jeopardizes everyone’s rights. The laws that assure free speech for neo-Nazis and pornographers also protect the rights of anti-war protesters, civil rights workers, lesbian and gay activists and others fighting for peace, justice, fairness, and equality.

5. What is the university’s official position on controversial speech?

The university has a legal, and indeed a moral, obligation to ensure that it protects the free exchange of ideas. The principles of academic freedom demand that all ideas (with the exception of those involving “unprotected speech” such as threats of violence) are given a fair opportunity to rise or fall on their own merit; only then can we have any confidence in our own opinions and beliefs. For this reason, the university will remain a neutral venue and provide the same level of safety and respect to all speakers. As Thomas Jefferson said of his own university, "here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it."

6. What is the university’s response to bigoted or offensive speech?

SUNY Oswego strives to ensure a safe environment for all constitutionally protected speech, regardless of its content, and encourages university community members to fully understand their right to free speech under the First Amendment. The university also supports forums and symposia on controversial topics where they can be discussed and debated in an intellectually stimulating and productive manner.

Responding to Controversial Speech

SUNY Oswego is committed to the free exchange of ideas. To that end, you are likely to encounter ideas to which you object during your time on campus. When a controversial speaker comes to campus, you may want to make your disagreement with the speaker's ideas clear.

What Not to Do

Sometimes, individuals respond to controversial speech with what is known as the heckler’s veto. The heckler’s veto refers to an effort to stop (veto) a speaker by shouting (heckling) while the individual is on stage thus making it impossible for the audience to hear the speaker’s message. While shouting down a speaker may feel cathartic, it is one of the least effective means of countering a speaker. It does not offer competing ideas, makes it easy for the speaker and others to dismiss you/your position, and will lead to your removal from the event and possible conduct action against you. You may not threaten a speaker or commit any violent act against a speaker. Nor may you participate in the creation of a situation in which the speaker cannot be heard.

What To Do

We encourage SUNY Oswego students to consider the following options designed to engage, reject, or counter the ideas of a speaker. Each of these tactics serves a different purpose and will be effective in different situations. Think carefully about your goals as well as your resources in crafting a response to a controversial speaker.

Engage the Speaker

We encourage students to research and develop their own opinions on the issues of the day. This process includes understanding the logic and reasoning behind positions with which you disagree. When a speaker comes to campus, you have an opportunity to engage an individual about their views rather than relying on social media, news coverage, academic research, or the words of others. Engaging the speaker respectfully allows you to demonstrate to the speaker and others in attendance a different perspective along with providing an opportunity to learn more about or reveal flaws in the speaker’s position. The tactics listed below require preparation and should be undertaken in good faith and with respect for the speaker and audience.

Participate in the Q&A period: Most speakers allow time for questions at the end of an event. Ask a well-researched, thoughtful question that calls on the speaker to explain or defend their views considering other research or implications that you can see. Taking advantage of this opportunity requires you to have a strong grasp of the issue as well as of the position held by the speaker. If the speaker is an author, read their recent work. If it is a political candidate, review their literature or watch interviews.
Ask to join a student meet & greet: Many speakers brought to the campus meet with a smaller group of students during their trip. Ask if you can be part of that group. Taking advantage of this opportunity allows you to engage in a direct conversation with an individual with whom you disagree to understand their position as well as offering your own. This option again requires you to prepare in advance.

Reject the Speaker

While there are some speakers whose ideas you want to interrogate to better understand why and how they came to a particular position, there may be other speakers whose ideas you want to clearly reject in a way where the rejection is clear to all in attendance. Numerous strategies allow you to reject the ideas of a speaker while still respecting the individual’s right to speak. These strategies require coordination, preparation, and self-control.

Walk-out: Sit quietly and wait for the event to begin. At a predetermined point or with a signal, a group of individuals rise and walk out in silence. The impact of this strategy hinges on having a large group of participants ready to act in concert. Walking out sends a clear sign that you (and the others who walk out) reject the message of the speaker and leaves a smaller audience for the event.
Turning your back: Similar to the walk-out, a group of individuals simultaneously turning away from the speaker sends a clear signal to the speaker and audience that you reject the speaker’s message. This strategy also requires a large group of well-organized participants who act in concert. It should be selected in place of the walk-out when physically leaving a space is particularly challenging OR when you want to simultaneously hear and object to the speaker.
Ticket buyout: Speakers seek an audience for their ideas. Reject their views by denying them an audience. For ticketed events, arrange with others who object to the message to get tickets. Then, simply do not attend leaving the speaker with largely empty chairs.

Counter the Ideas

The previous strategies listed hinge on the speaker. In most cases, however, the ideas rather than the speaker are what you object to. Our constitutional commitment to free speech stems in part from the belief that the best way to counter the positions we object to is by offering other positions. Good ideas draw attention and consensus while bad ideas fall out of circulation. The following strategies provide means of countering rather than engaging or rejecting the speaker’s ideas.

Protest outside the event: While you may not interfere with individuals seeking to enter or exit the location where the event is held, you may stage a protest with signs or chants. Both signs and chants provide a way to signal that you hold a different position than the speaker and send a signal that can be easily picked up by the media and bystanders. Protests will not, however, persuade the undecided nor do they offer a space for thoughtful or analytical discourse.
Visibility Campaigns: The group hosting a speaker often runs a promotional campaign with fliers or posters. Run a counter visibility campaign focused on (1) your objection to the speaker’s ideas, (2) ideas you believe make more sense than those of the speaker, or (3) promote counterprogramming.
Counter-programming: Plan a competing event. For maximum impact, the event can occur at the exact time as the speaker to which you object. This programming might take many forms. You might invite a speaker who holds a different position or arrange for a teach-in or speak-out within the campus community. These events provide an opportunity to have an extended discussion about the issue at hand and can focus on specific perspectives or a range of ideas.