Freedom of speech advocates claim that the First Amendment was threatened last Tuesday when the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal filed by the editors of a student-run college newspaper against the schools's administrators. The Supreme Court decision upholds the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to allow administrators to continue censoring public university newspapers throughout the Midwest.
Dean Patricia Carter of Governors State University in Illinois first incited the battle when she censored the school newspaper, The Innovator, after it published articles critical of administrators at the school.
Brought before the seventh circuit in June by the editors of the paper, Margaret Hosty and Jeni Porche, the court permitted to censor student newspapers based on the 1988 case Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, in which the freedom of speech of high school journalists was limited.
By denying certiorari, the Supreme Court allowed the previous ruling by the circuit court to stand.
Although the seventh circuit court only the states strictly under its jurisdiction -- Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin, the ruling may affect court decisions in other states in the future.
"If the court's decision is permitted to stand, the results will be disastrous for adult students in any expressive venue who might clash with prurient or political administrative interests," Hosty said, after she originally lost her case.
Although concern exists over the growing issue of censorship of college newspapers, Dartmouth publications will most likely remain unaffected in this manner in the near future.
Dean of the College James Larimore discussed the issue of censorship in an interview with The Dartmouth, explaining that "censorship is just not a good thing."
"For student organizations, the approach that we take here is to give them independence as long as they're not interfering with the law," Larimore said.
Larimore said that different rules stand for independent publications and for those that are closely affiliated with the administration of a school; however, no publications at Dartmouth are subject to censorship.
"Because our publications are not subject to prior review, they have a great deal of responsibility and accountability. I think we need to leave that responsibility where it belongs," Larimore said.
Dartmouth's General Council Robert Donin affirmed the safety of freedom of speech at Dartmouth.
"As a general matter, Dartmouth is committed to freedom of expression, which includes editorial freedom for student publications so long as they do not violate law or College policy," Donin said.
Barry Scherr, Provost of Dartmouth, also said that this sort of censorship is unlikely to affect Dartmouth.
"I suspect that this could happen only in a handful of cases, where other state institutions in the area may try to exercise greater control," Scherr said.
