On March 24, more than 100 University of Michigan student protesters interrupted the 101st Annual Honors Convocation in protest of the University’s investment in companies profiting from Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Four days later, on March 28, the University sent an email to the campus community containing a draft of a Disruptive Activity Policy, the newest modification to the University’s free speech guidelines.
Since then, students have expressed concern over how the policy might impact their right to protest on campus. As chants ring from the Central Campus Diag to Pierpont Commons on North Campus, The Michigan Daily spoke with students to understand their thoughts surrounding the U-M administration’s response to student activism.
When the draft policy was released, the U-M campus community was invited to fill out a feedback survey in the University administration’s March 28 email, which was open until April 3.
While the campus community has responded to the DAP in both writing and protest, the DAP has received attention from outside organizations as well. The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan released a statement April 3 which detailed a letter they sent to University President Santa Ono, asking him either to rescind the policy entirely or make substantial changes to it.
On April 5, 1,635 U-M faculty, students and staff signed an open letter opposing the University’s recently released DAP draft. This letter cited part of the draft policy which stated protests cannot prevent movement around campus.
“No Person without legal authority may prevent or impede the free flow of persons about campus, whether indoors or outdoors, including any pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicular traffic,” the draft policy reads.
In response, faculty members wrote that they believe this policy would jeopardize the University’s tradition of student activism.
“We maintain that as a collective, we now pride ourselves on the outcomes of this persistent and principled activism, even though many of the protests were not popular at the time – including protests spearheaded by Martin Luther King, whose legacy U-M now celebrates annually,” the letter reads. “The very nature of protest is disruptive because it seeks to incite change.”
The April 5 letter also referred to the 1987 Supreme Court case City of Houston v. Hill. The case ruled that a licensing ordinance violated the First Amendment by giving city officials complete discretion over the placement of news racks in the city. The letter said the same principle applied to the DAP because, if enacted, the University would have complete discretion over what is defined as “disruptive activity.”
“… it was substantially overbroad and invalid,” the letter reads. “Similarly, the “Disruptive Activity Policy” would criminalize behaviors that occur normally throughout the course of a campus day ….”
Fifteen members of the University Faculty Senate Assembly also signed an open letter to Ono to express their disagreement with the DAP. In their letter, the members listed historical examples of student activism on campus and stated that the policy would stifle student advocacy in the future.
“This new policy would punish students and faculty who ‘disrupt’ University operations,” the letter reads. “In fact ‘disruptive activities’ have been the principal vehicle by which activists have challenged the injustices that mar our common life.”
In an interview with The Michigan Daily at a pro-Palestine protest on March 28, U-M alum Benjamin Boss said he believes the DAP contradicts the University’s outward messages of support for free speech.
“I think it’s pretty hypocritical to talk about respecting our past of protest and free speech and then in the same announcement, try and punish people for doing so and intimidate students who are trying to use those rights,” Boss said.
Multiple U-M students said they felt the DAP was a direct and targeted response to the interruptions at the 101st Honors Convocation. LSA senior Ian Sandler-Bowen said he thought the DAP unfairly attacked pro-Palestine activists.
“(Ono) is just, for lack of a better title, a little butt hurt about his Honors Convocation being disrupted,” Sandler-Bowen said. “I’ve been to a number of various University functions and speaker events that have been disrupted by various protests, and this is the only time that the University has decided to put forward a new policy.”
In an interview with The Daily at the Day of Disruption protest on Monday, Taubman sophomore Ryan Finlay described himself as a pro-Israel presence at the rally and said the University should have taken additional steps to celebrate students after the disruption at the convocation.
“I don’t think the DAP was an appropriate response,” Finlay said. “The ideal response to that disruption was to host it again with a better ticketing process and having a zero-tolerance policy for people disrupting the event. Parents and grandparents came into town to celebrate their kids and their academic achievements at the University and they weren’t able to share that special moment.”
Finlay said the DAP was an unfortunate but necessary policy to ensure events hosted by the University are not disrupted in the future.
“I think it’s unfortunate but necessary because we have to make sure that graduation can go smoothly,” Finlay said. “It is a time for students to celebrate their education, but a lot of students’ lives don’t revolve around what’s happening on the other side of the earth. They can’t enjoy their university life and celebrate their education if they know about these events.”
In a post on Instagram, the U-M Black Student Union wrote that the DAP actively suppresses Palestinian student voices, and measures like this from the U-M administration will hurt the organization’s long-standing relationship with the University.
“It is our hope that this good faith collaboration can continue,” the post read. “However, if the University continues down the path of haphazardly dictating what is right and wrong to feel, say, and do – seen especially in the proposed Disruptive Activity Policy – our working relationship will be in jeopardy. We refuse to allow the University to use Black students as figureheads of a dangerously flawed DEI program while they simultaneously suppress and attempt to delegitimize the voices of Palestinian students on campus.”
Daily News Editor Sneha Dhandapani can be reached at sdhanda@umich.edu. Daily Staff Reporter Eilene Koo can be reached at ekoo@umich.edu.