OHIO — The
University of Cincinnati and its chapter of Young Americans for Liberty reached
a temporary agreement Thursday, allowing the students to gather signatures —
but that doesn’t mean the group’s free speech lawsuit is finished in court. Maurice Thompson, YAL’s attorney, said the organization is
allowed under the agreement to collect petition signatures in any public forum
on campus without needing to schedule with the university. The agreement will
last until the end of the court case and only affects YAL, Thompson said. YAL filed suit Feb. 22 after the university allegedly
confined the group’s petitioning to a “free speech area,” the use of which
required two weeks’ advance notice. YAL claims these policies are
unconstitutional because they limit student free speech. YAL attempted to collect signatures for a ballot initiative
to make Ohio a “right-to-work” state, but the free speech zone allowed members
to speak with only six students because of low foot-traffic. Thompson said the university reached the agreement to slow
down the case; a hearing had been scheduled for Tuesday but was cancelled after
the agreement. A hearing on a permanent injunction against the policy will take
place May 30, and Thompson said the judge “promised a decision” by June 15. Greg Hand, a UC spokesman, said reaching a temporary
agreement proves the university is accommodating to its students. He said the
agreement is essentially the university “filling out the paperwork” for YAL,
which the group “could have done themselves.” Hand added that the free speech zone is not a requirement
for every event. He explained that off-campus groups and larger events
typically use the zone, and that events happen “every day” that don’t require
the zone’s use. However, UC’s
Use of Facilities Manual states that “demonstrations, picketing or rallies”
must reserve the space, but does not define those terms. The manual also states
that anyone violating the policy could be charged with trespassing. YAL claimed the
university can misconstrue those terms to fit certain events, but Hand said
it’s up to the students to decide if their event fits those definitions. “The university believes,” Hand said, “that our policies and
procedures are adequate to allow for free speech while maintaining the academic
mission of the institution.” By Nick Glunt, SPLC staff writer
© 2012 Student Press Law Center