UCSC Chancellor Blumenthal interrogated on Student Rights

April 23, 2010

A routine Academic Senate meeting turned into a heated forum to criticize Chancellor Blumenthal’s hesitancy in changing the student judicial proceedings. Various faculty members voiced concerns about the current judicial proceedings, saying they violate students’ right to due process and also have a chilling effect on political protests.

In a press conference before the Academic Senate meeting, Professor Robert Miester addressed the issue of vicarious liability, a legal principle where one person can be held accountable for a group's actions. "[It's] permissible public policy, " Miester said, "to ‘chill’ a party." This is in reference to section 101.10 of the Student Policies and Regulations handbook that gives the administration jurisdiction in off-campus events. Miester continued, "The entire point of the 1st amendment is to distinguish the difference from a political demonstration and a fraternity party."

The administration is applying the principle of vicarious in holding 35 people accountable for the Kerr Hall damage. Only 45 of the 75 students who remained at the end of the occupation received summonses. The head count during the final minutes of the occupation does not reflect the hundreds that may have passed through the building at some point during the weekend, none of which were summonsed.

The evidence presented to the 35 students being held accountable for nearly $35,000 worth of damage is extremely circumstantial. In a recent student survey 84% of respondents agreed that specific material evidence is needed to hold students accountable to specific acts of property damage. Only 6% disagreed.

These summonses may be more than simply dealing with damaged property. "Doug Z has said 'this is not a personal process,'" one student speaker said, "it is not a personal process, it’s a political process." Faculty has said that these judicial actions are squelching activist voices, and shaming the campus's history of student movements. Professor Gail Hershatter said of the judicial process, “You have [Doug Zuidema] acting as detective, judge, juror, corrections officer and probation officer.” A system she likened to Imperial China.

The senate meeting question and answer period, directed at Chancellor Blumenthal and Executive Vice Chancellor (EVC) David Kliger, lasted a little over an hour. Nearly every question related to the Kerr Hall occupation and the student judicial process. Students, mostly seated off to the side, hissed at some of the Chancellors remarks and applauded the faculty in their over-arching criticism of the judicial process. Their presence was felt by the senators until the academic senate chair, Lori Kletzer, asked the students to remain quiet.

Only a single comment by the chancellor was met with applause from the students. "I don't want to defend, at a deep level, the student code of conduct." He said, "As I understand it, it keeps with national norms. Just because we do something and other people do it, does not make it right."

Although he did admit problems with the process, he did not express a willingness to drop the charges and instead said that a new committee will be formed. This committee would review the judicial process, include input from students and faculty, and would be co-chaired by the EVC. The chancellor was also emphatic in stating that in no way would any changes be instituted ex-post facto.

Police surveillance has increased at university protests, an apparent violation of an Academic Senate resolution passed in 2004. "What is the point," a senator asked to a huge applause, "of photographing students who are doing nothing wrong?" Blumenthal's response: "It is appropriate to have a record of protests that turn violent." The protest in question was not Kerr Hall however, but a peaceful Language Studies rally. He than emphasized, "I have no desire to intimidate students.”

Only one professor spoke from an opposing view-point. He alluded that the free speech movement in Berkeley, cited in other professors’ speeches, may have caused more harm than good.

The $944.00 restitution charge has numerous unintended consequences. Because the charge is treated like a fee, and placed on the students’ university bill, failure to pay will result in an academic hold. If a student has a hold on their account and cannot enroll they will not be eligible for financial aid. This has the potential of acting as a de facto expulsion.