The following message is from the Office of the President.
UMW Campus Community,
Following this past weekend’s event on Jefferson Square, I know there is a great deal of confusion, anger, and sadness among members of our community. I am sorry that this is where we are, especially at this otherwise joyous time of year. Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to meet with 17 students who expressed questions and concerns, further demonstrating our shared commitment to freedom of expression and continued support of our students. I have benefitted from many conversations with members of our UMW community, and I am happy to engage with students and employees in civil and respectful discourse on these challenging issues.
I will be reaching out to meet with the leadership of SGA, UFC, USC, and the Alumni Board to address any questions about the University’s response. Let me begin this dialogue by addressing some of the most frequently asked questions I have received:
Why would you arrest students for engaging in a peaceful protest? Isn’t this a violation of their First Amendment rights?
That is not why the students were arrested. The students became engaged in an unsanctioned event on campus by knowingly violating university policy. It is necessary to impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions to enable a diverse community to enjoy its right to free expression.
By all accounts, our student protesters were peaceful and not engaging in any form of antisemitic rhetoric.
What policy did the protesters violate?
Our Expressive Activity Policy mandates that “persons shall comply with the directions of any University official acting in the performance of his or her duty.”
On Friday afternoon, University officials communicated to the event organizers that while the event could continue, the encampment would need to be taken down for the health and safety of campus. This prohibition was shared directly with event organizers and with the UMW community.
On both Friday and Saturday, there were multiple envoys to the students both written and in person, delivered by multiple campus leaders. On Friday, those efforts were successful, and the tents came down beginning at 8:30 p.m. in compliance with the University’s directive, and the protest continued peacefully. On Saturday, the encampment returned in violation of the prohibition. Event organizers were informed that the event was cancelled and were directed to clear their encampment and to leave Jefferson Square and that individuals remaining in the area were subject to legal and disciplinary action.
What risk to campus did the encampment pose?
As word of the planned protest spread on Thursday afternoon, I began receiving communication from both local and state officials expressing concern that encampments posed significant safety risks. Those from the highest levels of state government and law enforcement to local and campus officials responsible for public and campus safety shared these concerns throughout Thursday evening and Friday, informing me that their intelligence showed a likelihood of outside interference from both protesters and counter-protesters with the intent to cause disruption.
By Friday, event organizers shared open invitations to the campus community and those outside of the community to attend and stay.
But UMW’s encampment was peaceful, why punish protesters for what is happening at other universities?
With the help of law enforcement and other experts, it is my job to assess risk and determine what reasonable content-neutral time, place, and manner restrictions must be imposed to secure a safe campus for protesters and non-protesters alike. It would be a dereliction of my duties to ignore the advice of experts who possess far more intelligence and expertise regarding potential risks to the operations and safety of campus. If a disruption occurred or worse, someone was injured, it would be hard to justify ignoring this guidance.
I tell students and parents when they join the UMW community, student safety is my top priority and greatest responsibility. I could not ignore the warnings and allow a potential hazard to exist on campus 24/7 throughout finals week. While others might have the liberty to supplant their judgment for the judgment of law enforcement, I do not.
Why did you not try to negotiate with students to find a compromise and avoid arrest?
Multiple attempts were made to persuade the students to take down the encampment. Other than what is explicitly spelled out in the Expressive Activity Policy, no other time, place, and manner restrictions were imposed. Protesters were free to continue their protests in Jefferson Square throughout the week. The protesters took down the tents Friday night. On Saturday, the encampment returned in violation of the prohibition. Event organizers were informed that the event was cancelled and were directed to clear their encampment and to leave Jefferson Square and that individuals remaining in the area were subject to legal and disciplinary action. The 12 who were arrested made clear they would rather be arrested than comply. In short, they consciously committed an act of civil disobedience to protest what they believed to be their right to build an encampment on campus.
Don’t these arrests violate the legacy of James Farmer?
I do not think so. Much like James Farmer and other civil rights activists of the 1960s, the 12 protesters engaged in an act of civil disobedience, which they are entitled to do. But civil disobedience is distinct from First Amendment-protected speech. It involves breaking a law and accepting the consequences. I do not agree that a prohibition to build an encampment in this context is unjust, but the protesters took a different view and chose to civilly disobey.
The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. described civil disobedience in this way: “When one breaks the law that conscience tells him is unjust, he must do it openly, he must do it cheerfully, he must do it lovingly, he must do it civilly – not uncivilly – and he must do it with a willingness to accept the penalty.”
What are the disciplinary consequences for these students?
Student Affairs staff have followed up with each student arrested to provide resources and information on next steps for the process of student conduct violations concerning failure to comply with a University order. Sanctions are typically minor for any first violation and will depend on the circumstances of each case, but in any case, our approach is educational in nature, not punitive. It is not our intention to suspend or expel students in this situation.
I have a scheduled meeting with the Commonwealth’s Attorney to make clear that UMW’s focus in this matter is on its educational mission with a goal to make this a learning experience for all concerned, including a university president.
Over the course of the coming weeks and throughout the summer, we have work to do in preparing for our return to campus in the fall. This includes revising some policies and procedures, including those related to time, place, and manner with respect to free expression, engaging leadership in tabletop exercises centered on resolving and deescalating conflicts, and strategizing about how our students and employees might more productively engage with leadership in moments like we experienced this weekend.
The conclusion of the encampment in Jefferson Square is just the beginning of our continued conversation.
I ask you to join me in focusing on the future, particularly for our graduating seniors who are just days and steps away from crossing the stage at Commencement and deserve a joyous recognition of this tremendous accomplishment. It’s a graduation some four years in the making, and a particularly challenging four years at that. We want to ensure that our students and their families can celebrate their achievement.
Sincerely,
Troy D. Paino, J.D., Ph.D.
President
