Katey Woodruff, Special to The Denisonian–
Over the summer, the Denison University administration put in place a new policy for student demonstrations. Previously, demonstrations and protests fell under the rules for events but were not regulated.
The new policy more clearly defines what is counted as a demonstration, requires demonstrators to get approval from the Division of Student Life, requires three days’ notice before a demonstration is held, and prohibits the use of masks that conceal students’ identities. Many parties on campus have expressed issues with the new policy.
The policy states that “demonstrators are responsible for engaging constructively with university administration through proactive communication and coordination. This allows the university to facilitate and protect protesters’ rights and promote campus safety.”
The Denison Campus Governance Association’s main grievance is that they were not consulted as a voice for the student population while the policy was being developed.
“We want the process of how the policy was made to be altered and changed,” said Brennan Kelley ‘26, a philosophy, politics, and economics major and Policy Chair of the DCGA. “DCGA is supposed to be a representative voice of the student body with impassioned student leaders that are a part of all of these organizations that this policy affects.”
DCGA has been vocal with administration about the lack of student involvement in the policy. They have been creating a list of potential amendments and changes to be shown when the policy is up for review.
“The end ideal to me is for students, when they have a problem or something that they want to change about this campus, that they have the ability to organize, the ability to express their dissatisfaction, or what things they find wrong and actually effectively make change to solve and address those problems,” said Kelley. “Free speech and protest is one of the most important aspects of that.”
DCGA passed a document titled “A Resolution to Reform the Demonstration Policy” in early December that detailed their specific complaints. The group has also been communicating with many student associations, faculty, and the student trustees, recent graduates who represent a student perspective, from the board of trustees.
Many student organizations have come out with complaints about the policy, stating that it is inhibiting their ability to protest efficiently and timely. The main groups that have had issues with the policy and have communicated with DCGA are Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Muslim Student Association, Outlook, and Green Team.
The main complaints are regarding the “no-mask policy” and the longer approval time.
“They talk about how they want students to be able to express their point of view but the demonstration policy is a punitive measure for any form of civil disobedience,” said Duncan Curry ‘25, biochemistry major, and Students for Justice in Palestine executive. “The vagueness of the original guidelines were specifically at strength because you could evaluate on a case-by-case basis.”
Curry referenced a SJP protest on the Reese-Shackelford Common outside of a Burton Morgan Board of Trustees meeting that was to encourage divestment topics for their next meeting. He was facing disciplinary action for entering Burton-Morgan to share with the trustees that he and other SJP members would like to meet with them at River Road Coffeehouse for civil discussion on the matter.
Another effort to make changes to the policy is a letter sent to Weinberg and Provost Kim Coplin by a group of roughly 20 professors during Big Red Weekend on Nov. 1 and 2. The letter asks for the possibility of discussions and revisions to the policy.
One of those professors, international studies professor Chris Crews, cited the policy’s definition of a demonstration requiring a permit to include things such as teach-ins, vigils, leafleting, and signature-gathering as problematic.
“The message that it sends to a lot of people is that anything that somehow discusses politics requires a demonstration permit, which makes no sense,” Crews said.
Crews also takes issue with the fact that through no past era of political engagement, whether in the 1960s, 1970s, or 1980s, was there a policy put in place, no matter how disruptive the action. He questions the political motivations of one being put in place in response to students’ concerns involving Palestine.
“On one hand, we talk a lot about the importance of critical intellectual engagement, developing autonomous citizens who value democratic deliberation, but when we try to put those actions into practice it seems like we run into this administrative blockade in the form of this demonstration policy,” Crews said. “In some ways, it feels to many faculty that our institutional and mission values aren’t lining up with the actual policies that our leadership are putting into place.”
A more recent effort by those same professors was a letter sent to the Campus Affairs Council in late December asking for the current policy to be put on pause for the next semester and for it to be considered again at the general faculty meeting in February. There are currently no changes to the policy or its implementations, following this second letter. The group of professors as well as the student organizations, such as DCGA, plan to continue bringing up their issues with how the policy was created and implemented until a resolution is met.
The Governance Document and the Code of Regulations for the university establishes the faculty’s responsibility to protect academic freedom and the need for faculty approval on policies regarding such things.
“Academic freedom and the right of students to express their views is crucial and in a way central to a liberal arts college and the kind of education that Denison is supposed to be providing to students,” said philosophy professor emeritus Steven Vogel, who helped draft and pass the current free speech policy. “They are supposed to be teaching them to think for themselves and to not allow themselves to be limited or silenced by anyone.”
There has been a nationwide trend in universities limiting protests and demonstrations in recent years. According to studies done by the Knight Foundation, roughly 30% fewer college students surveyed are confident in the security of free speech on their campus from 2016 to 2024.
“Everyone in the community has the right to express their views, even if those views are ones that other people disagree with, and the demonstration policy, just on the face of it, limits students’ ability to have protests or demonstrations,” Vogel said.