Abstract
Much has been written in recent years about the rise in racial hostility on college campuses, about "hate speech" codes and educational measures adopted by many public universities in response to the hostilities, and about the issues of free speech and "political correctness" raised thereby. The debate is unlikely to be quieted by the United States Supreme Court's decision in R.AV. v. City of St. Paul, which raises new doubts about the constitutionality of a great many campus antiharassment policies. Some scholars have approached these issues painfully, reluctantly choosing between dearly held principles of equality and freedom of expression. In recent years, however, Arizona State University ("A.S.U." or "the University") has refused to abandon either principle in the name of the other. Instead, A.S.U. has adopted a multifaceted approach that includes: (1) enactment of an antiharassment policy that prohibits the clearest abuses of speech and conduct; (2) creation of a Campus Environment Team ("CET") charged with encouraging a climate on campus in which discriminatory harassment is less likely to occur; and (3) continuing efforts to administer these policies in a manner that promotes free speech and academic freedom. While many considered these to be contradictory goals, they proved to be complementary. The experiences of the CET in its first two years suggest that racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of discrimination can be combatted best by forming the broadest possible coalition within the campus community to oppose such discrimination by word and deed.
Recommended Citation
Calleros, Charles R.
(1992)
"Reconciliation of Civil Rights
and Civil Liberties After
RAV. v. City of St. Paul:
Free Speech, Antiharassment
Policies, Multicultural Education,
and Political Correctness at
Arizona State University,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1992:
No.
4, Article 2.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1992/iss4/2