Emory University Launches New Open Expression Policy: Promoting Free Speech and Dialogue on Campus

Emory university’s New open Expression Policy: A Balanced Approach to Free Speech and Campus Safety

March 21,2025

After extensive deliberations and collaboration between the University Senate and Emory University management,a new Open Expression Policy was announced today. The policy aims to protect the rights of all community members to express themselves,assemble peacefully,and demonstrate while establishing content-neutral limitations that prioritize the university’s academic mission and campus safety for every student,faculty,and staff member at Emory.

A Collaborative effort

The growth of this policy reflects a commitment to shared governance and open dialogue within the Emory community. University Senate President George Shepherd emphasized, “This new Open Expression Policy has benefitted profoundly from the perspectives not only of all the Senate’s stakeholders, but also of the university administration. I am proud that, working cooperatively together, we have produced a balanced Open Expression Policy that is among the country’s best.”

Emory President Gregory L. Fenves echoed this sentiment, stating, “This is a very critically important policy for the university, and I’m pleased we could develop it by working closely with Professor Shepherd and the University Senate. Together, we have made a policy that protects expression for members of the Emory community and supports the Emory mission in a safe campus habitat for all. Our collaboration shows the value of shared governance.”

This approach stands in contrast to some recent controversies at other universities, where policy changes regarding free speech have been perceived as top-down decisions, leading to student protests and faculty dissent. The collaborative process at Emory could serve as a model for other institutions seeking to navigate these complex issues.

The Policy’s Genesis: Spring 2024

The journey toward the new open Expression Policy began in the spring of 2024, when the University senate initiated a committee to formulate recommendations for university leadership. The Senate’s subcommittee comprised representatives from all Emory stakeholder groups, ensuring diverse perspectives from staff, students, alumni, and faculty. Their proposal underwent further refinement through collaborative discussions between senate and administration representatives.During these discussions, Emory implemented a policy addendum to formalize processes consistently enforced. This addendum was subsequently integrated into the new policy.Earlier this month, the University senate overwhelmingly approved the policy.

Key provisions of the Open Expression Policy

The Open Expression Policy addresses a range of issues, aiming to strike a balance between freedom of expression and the need to maintain order and safety on campus. Some of the key provisions include:

• Protection of Viewpoints: Individuals have the right to express their viewpoints without significant interruptions. While dissent is permitted, it cannot disrupt or substantially interfere with others’ activities.
• Location Restrictions: Restrictions are placed on where and how open expression events can occur on Emory property.These restricted areas include:
  • Spaces where academic classes take place.
  • Offices, museums, research laboratories, and computer centers.
  • Hospitals, clinics, and other facilities essential to the university’s operations.
  • Locations posing safety risks,including those related to traffic.
• Time Restrictions: Protests and demonstrations are not permitted between midnight and 7 a.m. However, other forms of expression are allowed during these hours in open areas, provided they are not disruptive.
• Prohibition of Occupations: Building occupations and takeovers are strictly prohibited.
• Limitations on Temporary Structures: Restrictions apply to the types of temporary structures permitted on campus. Specifically, tents and similar structures may be prohibited.

The policy recognizes that certain campus environments, such as residence halls, libraries, and dining facilities, require additional considerations. While expressive activity is permitted in these locations, it is indeed more limited due to the fundamental need for students to eat, sleep, and study without disruption.

Balancing Free speech with Campus Safety: A National Perspective

The creation of Emory’s Open expression Policy comes amid ongoing debates nationwide regarding the balance between free speech rights and the need to ensure a safe and inclusive campus environment. at universities across the United States, administrators, faculty, and students grapple with difficult questions about the limits of permissible expression, particularly when that expression may be perceived as hateful, discriminatory, or threatening.

Such as, recent controversies at institutions like UC Berkeley and Middlebury College have highlighted the challenges of managing protests, controversial speakers, and the potential for violence or disruption. Some argue that universities have a responsibility to protect students from speech that creates a antagonistic environment, while others maintain that restricting speech, even offensive speech, undermines the principles of academic freedom and open inquiry.

Emory’s approach, which emphasizes collaboration and shared governance, could offer a path forward for other universities seeking to address these complex issues. By involving a broad range of stakeholders in the policy-making process, Emory aimed to create a framework that respects diverse perspectives and fosters a culture of constructive dialogue.

Practical Applications and Implications

the Open Expression Policy will likely have several practical implications for the Emory community. Students planning protests or demonstrations will need to be aware of the time, place, and manner restrictions outlined in the policy. Faculty members may need to consider how the policy applies to classroom discussions and guest speakers. and administrators will be responsible for enforcing the policy in a fair and consistent manner.

To ensure clarity and understanding, Emory plans to update its open Expression website with additional information, including a frequently asked questions section. This resource will be crucial in helping community members navigate the new policy and understand their rights and responsibilities.

One potential challenge will be addressing situations where the policy’s application is unclear or contested. Such as, determining whether a particular form of expression is “disruptive” or “substantially interferes” with others’ activities may require careful judgment and consideration of the specific context. It will be critically important for Emory to establish clear procedures for resolving disputes and ensuring that the policy is applied in a way that respects both free speech rights and the need for campus order.

Examining counterarguments

While the collaborative approach to crafting the Open Expression Policy is commendable, it’s essential to acknowledge potential counterarguments. Some might argue that the policy imposes restrictions that unduly limit free speech. For instance, the prohibition of protests between midnight and 7 a.m. could be viewed as hindering spontaneous demonstrations. Similarly, limitations on temporary structures might be seen as restricting symbolic forms of protest.

conversely, others might argue that the policy doesn’t go far enough in protecting vulnerable groups from hate speech or harassment.Critics might contend that the policy’s emphasis on content-neutrality could inadvertently allow for the expression of views that create a hostile environment for marginalized communities.

A key challenge for Emory will be monitoring the policy’s implementation and addressing any unintended consequences. Regular reviews and opportunities for feedback from the community will be crucial in ensuring that the policy effectively balances free speech rights with the need to create a safe and inclusive campus environment.

What are the potential challenges Emory University might face in implementing and enforcing its new Open Expression Policy, particularly regarding the definition and handling of “disruptive” expression?

Emory University’s New open Expression Policy: An Interview with Dr. Anya Sharma

Archyde News (AN): Welcome, Dr. Sharma. Thank you for joining us today to discuss Emory University’s new Open Expression Policy. Could you start by giving us yoru perspective as a legal scholar specializing in First Amendment rights and campus free speech?

dr. anya Sharma (AS): Thank you for having me.I believe Emory’s approach is a captivating case study. The new policy, as I understand it, attempts to thread the needle between protecting free speech, fostering academic freedom, and ensuring campus safety. It’s a complex balance, and striking the right chord is crucial for any university.

Key Policy Provisions and Implications

AN: The policy seems to address several key areas, including time, place, and manner restrictions.From a legal standpoint, how do you view the balance Emory is trying to achieve with thes provisions?

AS: The policy’s restrictions on when and where demonstrations can occur, as well as prohibitions on building occupations, are generally content-neutral.Content-neutral policies are frequently enough upheld in court if they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, such as maintaining order and safety. The 7 a.m. to midnight rule seems reasonable, but whether location is restricted is always a topic of debate.

AN: The policy appears to be the product of collaboration between the University Senate and administration.How significant is this collaborative process?

AS: The collaborative nature of this policy is very significant. It shows a commitment to shared governance, which is critical in educational settings. Such collaboration can lead to policies that are more sensitive to the needs of all stakeholders: students, faculty, and staff. It can also reduce the likelihood of pushback and legal challenges.

Navigating Controversies and Future Challenges

AN: In the article, it mentions that it’s tough to define what could be considered “disruptive” expression. What guidance needs to be in place to handle these types of issues?

AS: It’s a valid concern.The policy needs clear, transparent procedures for defining “disruptive” conduct. Furthermore, there should be established avenues for appeal. It is essential to avoid any appearance of subjective or arbitrary enforcement. Training for administrators and campus security is also essential to ensure consistent application of the policy.

AN: We’ve seen controversies around free speech on university campuses. Do policies like Emory’s offer a potential model for other institutions?

AS: Perhaps, yes. The emphasis on shared governance and the attempt to balance free expression with campus safety are both laudable goals. Tho,what works at Emory might not be a perfect fit for other universities with different campus cultures,student bodies,and levels of political engagement. It’s about finding a balance that genuinely respects the First Amendment rights of all community members while maintaining a safe and conducive habitat for learning and research.

AN: Regarding counterarguments, some might express that the policy may seem to go too far, while others may worry that it doesn’t go far enough. What do you think?

AS: It’s a dilemma inherent in defining what constitutes legitimate free expression. Any policy will have detractors. What Emory ultimately does depends on whether they are protecting student life or not. this will be a challenge for Emory. Is your policy limiting free speech rights and opening their campuses to opposed environments? What are your thoughts on that?

AN: Dr. Sharma, thank you for providing your insights into Emory’s Open Expression Policy. It was enlightening.We appreciate you taking the time to speak with us.

AS: Thank you for having me. I hope our conversation has been helpful.