The bill requires an institution or technical college to do all of the following: 1) conduct a survey biennially of students and employees on First Amendment rights, academic freedom, perceived political or other bias at the institution or technical college, and whether campus culture promotes self-censorship; 2) submit a report biennially to the legislature detailing the results of this survey; and 3) annually provide all students and employees with instruction in academic freedom, due process, and First Amendment protections.

Under the bill, a UW or technical college policy or employee may not limit the expressive rights and academic freedom of an instructor to 1) conduct research, publish, lecture, or teach in the academic setting; 2) require students to participate in instructional exercises with legitimate pedagogical purposes that involve exploring, or arguing for or against, any argument or assertion; or 3) speak publicly as a private citizen on matters of public concern.

The bill sets forth principles of academic freedom and freedom of expression to which the UW System and each institution must adhere, as well as UW System and institution responsibilities associated with these principles.

The bill requires a UW institution or technical college that is found by a state or federal court, by a preponderance of the evidence, to have violated any of the free speech or academic freedom provisions described above to include, for four years, the following disclaimer on all notices to individuals regarding admission to the UW institution or technical college: “NOTICE: We are required by the State of Wisconsin to inform you that within the last four years ... [insert name of UW institution or technical college] has violated the free speech or academic freedom provisions in the Wisconsin statutes.”

Under the bill, the attorney general, a district attorney, or any person whose expressive rights were violated may bring a court action against the Board of Regents of the UW System or the technical college district board for violation by a UW institution or technical college of any of the free speech or academic freedom provisions described above and may seek an injunction and recovery of damages, court costs, and attorney fees for persons aggrieved by the violation. In such an action, if the court finds a violation, the court must award to the plaintiffs all of the following: 1) total damages for all prevailing persons aggrieved by the violation of not less than $500 for the initial violation plus $50 for each day after the complaint is served that the violation remains ongoing, but not exceeding an aggregate amount of $100,000 for all cases stemming from a single controversy; and 2) court costs and reasonable attorney fees. An award to the plaintiffs of damages, court costs, or attorney fees must be paid from the UW institution’s or technical college’s administrative expense moneys.

Under the bill, a student enrolled in a UW institution or technical college has a property interest in maintaining the student’s status as a student that may be terminated against the student’s will only for due cause, including failure to meet academic standards or attendance requirements, failure to pay tuition or other fees, or violating conduct rules. A student accused of a disciplinary or conduct violation that carries a potential penalty of expulsion or suspension of more than nine days, and a UW institution’s or technical college’s employee accused of a disciplinary or conduct violation, have the right to be represented, at the person’s own expense, by a licensed attorney or non-attorney advocate who is permitted to fully participate during the disciplinary proceeding. The same right applies to a student organization, employee organization, or independent organization recognized by the UW institution or technical college (organization) accused of a violation and to a complaining student if the disciplinary proceeding arises from the student’s complaint. Prior to initiating a disciplinary proceeding or investigation, a UW institution or technical college must notify the student, employee, or organization that a complaint has been made and inform the student, employee, or organization of the student’s, employee’s, or organization’s due process rights. A UW institution or technical college must ensure that all parties to a disciplinary proceeding, including if applicable an accusing student, have access to all material evidence, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence, not later than one week prior to the start of any formal hearing or similar adjudicatory proceeding. Before a disciplinary proceeding is scheduled, and at least two business days before a student, employee, or organization may be questioned about allegations of violations of the institution’s or technical college’s disciplinary or conduct rules, the institution or technical college must advise the student, employee, or organization in writing of these rights. A UW institution or technical college is not obligated to follow the state’s rules of evidence in a disciplinary proceeding, but must make a good faith effort to include only relevant, probative evidence and must exclude evidence that is neither relevant nor probative. A UW institution or technical college must ensure that a disciplinary proceeding is carried out free from conflicts of interest by prohibiting overlap of administrative or adjudicative roles.

Under current law, the Wisconsin grant program, administered by the Higher Educational Aids Board, provides grants to resident students enrolled in eligible types of postsecondary schools, including UW institutions and technical colleges. The amount of funding available for these types of eligible postsecondary schools varies, and the UW System and technical colleges must annually submit to HEAB a proposed formula for awarding Wisconsin grants to students enrolled in UW institutions or technical colleges. HEAB must then approve, modify, or disapprove these proposed formulas for awarding grants to UW or technical college students in the next fiscal year.

Under this bill, a UW institution or technical college that violates any of the due process provisions described above more than once in a 10-year period is ineligible for allocation of Wisconsin grants for the longer of 1) a period of no less than one fiscal year; or 2) if the institution’s or technical college’s administrator causes the violation, until the administrator is permanently removed from his or her administrative role. HEAB’s formula for awarding Wisconsin grants must take these loss of allocation penalties into consideration. The violation giving rise to this penalty may be found, by a preponderance of the evidence, by any of the following: 1) a state or federal court; 2) HEAB; or 3) a legislative standing committee having jurisdiction over matters relating to higher education.

AB553,,10101. Academic freedom includes the freedom to explore all avenues of scholarship, research, and creative expression, and to reach conclusions according to one’s own scholarly discernment. Freedom of expression includes the right to discuss and present scholarly opinions and conclusions on all matters both in and outside the classroom. These freedoms include the right to speak and write as a member of an institution’s community or as a private citizen without institutional discipline or restraint on scholarly matters or on matters of public concern. The system and each institution shall remain committed to these principles and provide all members of an institution’s community the broadest possible latitude to explore ideas and to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn.

AB553,,11112. Although different ideas in an institution’s community often and quite naturally conflict, it is not the proper role of an institution to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions the institution or others find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive. Despite the great value of civility, concerns about civility and mutual respect may never be used as justification for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some members within an institution’s community.

AB553,,12123. The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not mean that members of an institution’s community may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. Consistent with long-standing practice informed by law, the system and each institution may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or discriminatory harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or confidentiality interests, or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of an institution. In addition, subject to sub. (3) (a) 2., the system and each institution may reasonably regulate the time, place, and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt ordinary activities. However, these exceptions to the general principle of freedom of expression shall be construed narrowly and may not be applied in a manner that is inconsistent with the system’s and each institution’s commitment to a completely free and open discussion of ideas.

AB553,,14141. Academic freedom carries the responsibility for the faithful performance of professional duties and obligations. All members of an institution’s community share in the responsibility for maintaining civility and a climate of mutual respect. Although members of an institution’s community are free to criticize and contest the views expressed on campus, they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others, including speakers who are invited to campus, to express views they reject or even loathe.