September 13, 2019 - Introduced by Representatives Horlacher, Vos, Murphy,
Allen, Brandtjen, Dittrich, Duchow, Edming, Felzkowski, Gundrum,
James, Katsma, Kitchens, Knodl, Krug, Kuglitsch, Kulp, Macco, Magnafici,
Quinn, Ramthun, Rohrkaste, Skowronski, Sortwell, Steffen, Tauchen,
Thiesfeldt and Tusler, cosponsored by Senators Kapenga, Stroebel,
Bernier, Craig and Olsen. Referred to Committee on Colleges and
Universities.
AB444,1,4
1An Act to amend 36.35 (1); and
to create 36.02 and 227.01 (13) (Lo) of the
2statutes;
relating to: free expression within the University of Wisconsin
3System, providing an exemption from rule-making procedures, and granting
4rule-making authority.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill requires the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
to adopt a policy on free expression that applies at the four-year and two-year
institutions of the system and supersedes and nullifies any prior Board of Regents
or institution policies or rules restricting free expression. The bill allows the Board
of Regents to adopt the policy without promulgating rules and requires the policy to
be adopted no later than 120 days after the bill's effective date. The policy must
contain statements regarding the following: 1) that the primary function of an
institution is the discovery, improvement, transmission, and dissemination of
knowledge; 2) that it is not the proper role of an institution to shield individuals from
speech protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; 3) that students
and faculty have the freedom to discuss any problem as permitted by the First
Amendment and within specified limits; 4) that any person lawfully present on
campus may protest or demonstrate, but that protests and demonstrations that
interfere with the expressive rights of others are subject to sanction; 5) that
campuses are open to invited speakers; 6) that public areas are public forums and
open on the same terms to any speaker; and 7) that institutions must remain neutral
on public policy controversies.
The policy must include a range of disciplinary sanctions for anyone under an
institution's jurisdiction who engages in violent or other disorderly conduct that
materially and substantially disrupts the free expression of others. In addition, the
policy must provide that in disciplinary cases involving expressive conduct, students
are entitled to a disciplinary hearing under published procedures that include
specified rights. The policy must require a formal investigation and disciplinary
hearing the second time a student is alleged to have interfered with the expressive
rights of others. If a student is twice found responsible for interfering with the
expressive rights of others at any time during his or her enrollment, the student must
be suspended for a minimum of one semester. If a student is found responsible for
such interference a third time, the student must be expelled.
The bill also requires the policy to allow any person to make a report that
another person has violated the policy. In addition, a formal investigation and
disciplinary hearing is required if two or more such reports are made regarding the
same person.
The bill provides that institutions may restrict student expression only for
expressive activity that is not protected by the First Amendment, including state or
federal law violations, defamation, specified types of harassment and threats,
certain invasions of privacy or confidentiality, and violations of reasonable time,
place, or manner restrictions on expressive activities.
The bill also requires the Board of Regents to make annual reports to the
legislature and governor that describe institutional neutrality, free expression
barriers and disruptions, and administrative handling and discipline relating to
those barriers and disruptions. Before a legislative standing committee can take any
action regarding a report, the bill requires the committee to hold a public hearing.
In addition, the bill does the following:
1. Allows a person whose expressive rights are violated by a violation of the
bill's requirements to bring an action to enjoin a violation and obtain reasonable
attorney fees and damages.
2. Allows a defendant who prevails in an action described above to recover
reasonable attorney fees if the action was frivolous or brought in bad faith.
3. Sets forth legislative findings regarding free expression at the institutions
of the UW System.
4. Requires the Board of Regents to provide notice to students upon adopting
the policy required under the bill.
5. Requires institutions to do the following: a) describe free expression policies
and procedures in freshman and transfer student orientation programs; b) provide
training on those policies and procedures to employees upon hiring; and c) provide
annual training on those policies and procedures to instructors.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
AB444,1
1Section
1. 36.02 of the statutes is created to read:
AB444,3,2
136.02 Campus Free Speech Act. (1) Legislative findings. The legislature
2finds all of the following:
AB444,3,43
(a) Article I, section 3, of the Wisconsin Constitution recognizes the right to
4speak freely and prohibits laws abridging the liberty of speech.
AB444,3,65
(b) The system has historically embraced a commitment to freedom of
6expression in policy.
AB444,3,97
(c) In recent years, institutions have abdicated their responsibility to uphold
8free speech principles and these failures make it appropriate for the system to restate
9and confirm its commitment in this regard.
AB444,3,1810
(d) In 1974, the Committee on Free Expression at Yale issued a statement
11known as the Woodward Report that stands as a classic defense of free expression
12on campuses; in 2015, the Committee on Freedom of Expression at the University
13of Chicago issued a similar and widely respected report; and in 1967, the Kalven
14Committee Report of the University of Chicago articulated the principle of
15institutional neutrality regarding political and social issues and the essential role of
16such neutrality in protecting freedom of thought and expression at universities. The
17principles affirmed by these 3 highly regarded reports are inspiring articulations of
18the critical importance of free expression in higher education.
AB444,3,2119
(e) The legislature views freedom of expression as being of critical importance
20and requires that each institution ensure free, robust, and uninhibited debate and
21deliberation by students whether on or off campus.
AB444,3,2322
(f) The legislature has determined that it is a matter of statewide concern that
23all institutions officially recognize freedom of speech as a fundamental right.