I fly the American flag from my window. I'm
lucky enough to have this right because I live in a private home. My peers, who live in dorms and other college-owned housing, aren't so fortunate. The College forbids display of any flags or banners from their dorm windows. The recent attacks have brought to light this antiquated policy that needs to change.
The terrorist attacks have provoked outrage in our community and unity not seen in recent memory. What better way could there be to further our bonds of togetherness than to allow students to express their patriotism? People have many different reasons for hanging the flag. Whether to remember the dead or to express solidarity with our ROTC student-soldiers here at Dartmouth or to support our government, students deserve the opportunity to express their opinions. Giving students that ability would bring the College closer to the ideals that make our nation so strong: free speech and freedom. The policy on flag flying, on page 186 of the Student Handbook, states, "The display of flags, banners, signs, and other objects from the outside of College buildings without prior approval from the Dean of the College or his designee is prohibited." The policy is unnecessarily broad. It makes sense that students be prohibited from flying flags from Parkhurst, as any reasonable person would assume that a flag there stood for the position of the administration. But would the same reasonable person walking past Mass Row infer that a flag flying from a dorm window stood for the opinion of the College? Probably not.
Dorm rooms, though owned by the College, seem to me quite different than communal buildings like classrooms. Each term students personally rent these dorm rooms, unlike communal classrooms and administrative buildings. Since students are lessees and the College is the landlord, would it be unreasonable for the College to treat students as many landlords treat their tenants and allow them to hang flags of their choosing from their windows?
There were good reasons for this policy when it was created, around the time of co-education. Women were not welcomed by some male students, who hung banners to the effect of "Women go home" that may have met the standard of harassment. But the Dartmouth of today is unrecognizable compared to the Dartmouth of 25 years ago, and it is inconceivable that students would hang similar banners today. The students have evolved; perhaps it is time for the policy to evolve as well. In fairness, it is impressive that the policy is content neutral. It was created in a heavy handed and overly broad fashion, but the administration resisted the temptation to say that it was okay to hang certain flags but not other (offensive) ones. Their position, though unduly restrictive, is at least philosophically consistent. The College is not bound by the Constitution, and in some cases it chooses to ignore it. But in this case, the administration should be given credit because it made a good effort to sculpt a policy that would pass Constitutional muster. Content neutrality should be preserved in any new and less restrictive policy.
Allowing students to express themselves is not without risk. Not everyone shares the same patriotism and love of America that I do. So it's quite likely that some students will hang flags deemed offensive by others. I imagine some left-leaning extremists might fly the hammer and sickle of the former Soviet Union. Perhaps some right-wing extremists might hang the Confederate flag. Both flags are symbols of oppression and might be offensive to some members of the community. But to allow this expression would facilitate the exchange of competing views that is so central to our mission as an educational institution. Senior Associate Dean of the College Dan Nelson was kind enough to discuss the policy with me. While we disagreed on the need for change, I was surprised and pleased to hear that he believes this: "There is not a right not to be offended here at Dartmouth." Given our agreement on this crucial point, I was surprised we would disagree. But Mr. Nelson pointed out that there could be aesthetic problems with flags hanging from dorm windows. It is a reasonable argument but, on a campus that includes such aesthetic monstrosities as the Choates and Gerry Hall, I think a few flags would be the least of our concerns. If you want to see what the dorms would look like without this restriction, take a look at the privately owned houses on campus. By and large, you see American flags. The flags are not particularly obtrusive, nor do they mar the aesthetic appeal of the College.
The policy was created in a different era with very different students. Were the policy revised to exempt personal dorm rooms, the College would be facilitating pluralism and the exchange of diverse viewpoints. If the commitment of the administration to these values is as strong as we have been led to believe, the only acceptable course of action is to repeal this archaic prohibition of expression.
