I was contacted by Ryan Lyk or the College Republicans at UMD. Ryan forwarded the letter they sent to UMD leadership. Here’s the text of the CR’s letter:

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA DULUTH ADMINISTRATION DENIES COLLEGE REPUBLICANS PRIVILIGES GRANTED TO COLLEGE DEMOCRATS

After being told that any type of poster or flyer that supported a candidate and encouraged students to vote for that candidate cannot be posted on campus, College Democrats released a wave of posters telling students to support Mark Dayton for governor.

When brought to the schools attention, they denied ever saying this to the College Republicans and suddenly changed the rules to allow them the same privileges.

The inquiry by the Republicans was originally brought to the schools attention during a Mark Dayton rally on campus where Dayton rally signs were posted all over campus. The school told the Republicans that there was limited privilege to do so because of the event, but that when the event ended, the posters would need to be removed. They also told the Republicans that signs telling students who to vote for could not be posted and that these signs were simply for directional purposes to the rally and did not violate any rule.

Now that the College Democrats have put up actual posters telling people who to vote for, these rules have changed to favor the Democrats.

The university should treat all political groups equally and not let one get away with privileges previously denied to groups of opposing views.

Republicans on campus are now responding to the event with a wave of ‘Vote Chip’ posters that will be put up immediately.

Clearly, UMD violated these students’ First Amendment rights by banning any signs from campus. Students don’t surrender their First Amendment rights when they walk onto a college campus.

That’s bad enough but this letter is clear. The university powers that be gave Democrats a big edge by letting them put their signs up while not letting the CRs post Emmer, Cravaack, Anderson, Severson and Barden posters up on campus.

This is a black mark on UMD’s record. They’ve gone from being a liberal institution to being an institution that tolerates censorship. That’s inexcusable, especially in light of the fact we should want students to have lively, respectful discussions on college campuses.

This is what happens when universities don’t put a high priority on intellectual diversity as well as racial and ethnic diversity. It’s time institutions of higher ed returned to the spirit of intellectual diversity for the students’ sake.

If that doesn’t work, then it’s time to start cleaning house at UMD.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “More on the UMD Censorship Scandal”

  • IF the rule were applied to all, then UMD would be on solid footing. They have the right to dictate what can and can not be posted as long as it is done in a fair manner that applies to ALL STUDENTS. That said – when you allow one and don’t allow the other…you are all wrong. It doesn’t matter which party was allowed, the fact that one was and one was not is what will get the UMD officials in trouble.

    LL

  • Cushman Davis says:

    UMD is in bed with Dayton. Yvonne Prettner Solon is Dayton’s running mate and UMD admin are best buds with the Solons. When I attended UMD years ago, they named one of the buildings after her late husband Sam Solon. So UMD will do anything to gave an advantage to Dayton.

Leave a Reply