On March 11, President Martha Pollack and Provost Michael Kotlikoff issued a statement announcing further changes to the Interim Expressive Activity Policy. The update was announced in an email sent to all students and staff.
Three changes have been implemented.
Prior registration of outdoor protests
First, regarding prior registration of outdoor protests expected to draw 50 or more people, the prior policy said that registration was “expected.” When asked, Day Hall representatives stated that this meant that unregistered events, or events where registration was disapproved were prohibited.
The revised interim policy now clarifies that unregistered events are allowed, but registration is strongly encouraged.
This concern was raised at meetings of the University Assembly (UA), the Student Assembly (SA) as well as a Faculty Open Forum. In addition, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) sent a letter to President Pollack on February 8, on this point, that drew a clarification from Stephanie Sechler, Senior Associate General Counsel on February 26 claiming that registration was not required.
Use of Open Flame
Second, the prior policy prohibited carrying open flames at protests. The revised interim policy now clarifies that “candles may be used at vigils if smaller than 6 inches”.
This concern drew comments as soon as the interim policy was released, because Cornell had a long history of outdoor candle light vigils.Given that this policy applied to outdoor protests, it could not be justified on the grounds of fire safety. Realistically, with the common availability of battery-operated LED fake candles, a prohibition against candle light vigils would be very difficult to enforce.
Postering
Third, the prior policy greatly restricted posting flyers outside and required each flier to show the name of a sponsoring person or organization and a date of posting to facilitate removal within two weeks. The policy states,
“Posters, signs, or light projections that have been erected or displayed in non-designated spaces without approval or that are more than two weeks old may be removed by appropriate university personnel, regardless of content. Any cost associated with the removal will be billed to the sponsoring Cornell organization, unit, or individual.”
The revised policy was “clarified to say explicitly that prior written permission is not required for posters, signs, flyers, and banners in designated locations. Posters, signs, flyers, and banners in non-designated spaces—regardless of content—may be removed by facility managers.”
This concern over postering drew criticism from the UA and SA. As a specific example, pro-Israel students had posted fliers with the photographs of hostages taken by Hamas, which were removed by pro-Palestine students and faculty. Many details of the poster regulations remain in dispute for both indoor and outdoor locations.
Current Status
Otherwise, the Interim Policy remains in effect. For example, on March 6, pro-Palestine demonstrators used amplified sound to briefly protest at Klarman Hall. Some of the protesters were identified. According to a statement issued by Vice President Joel Malina, “Participants were referred for disciplinary action and violators will be sanctioned. Repeat violators will be subject to increasingly severe sanctions.”
Although debate on campus regarding the time, place and manner of free expression continues, the Interim policy exposes a fundamental question. Should final say over conduct codes and enforcement procedures rest with shared governance bodies like the Faculty Senate, UA and SA, or should it be held by Day Hall? From 1868 until August 2021, shared governance bodies held the editing pen. Then, the Trustees voted on December 10, 2020 to delegate student codes and judicial to VP for Student and Campus Life Ryan Lombardi. Further, the topics now covered by the interim policy used to be covered by the Rules for the Maintenance of Public Order that are still required by New York State Law.
On February 22, the SA adopted Resolution 58 calling for the suspension of the interim policy pending clarification of a shared governance mechanism to adopt such policies and procedures. Further, as the cases against the protesters reach the University Hearing Board, it is not clear whether hearing board members will engage in “jury nullification” by refusing to hold individual students responsible for violating the interim policy.
