An Open Letter to President Robert Shelton from Concerned Faculty

We, the concerned faculty at the University of Arizona, write to express our relief upon hearing of your decision to dismiss criminal charges against Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull, two UA students unjustly arrested on campus as they were exercising their right to protected forms of speech on September 24 and 28, 2009. At news of their initial arrests we were shocked and outraged, as they amounted to a direct violation of the freedom to organize and to express public opposition on a University campus. These incidents were acutely felt, particularly when the context for the Arizona for Education rally on the 24th was to protest the state budget crisis and the administration’s fiscal and educational decision-making, which thus also made it appear as an attack on the principles of accountable and shared governance at the University. Your decision on Monday, September 28, 2009, to dismiss the criminal charges against these students, as well as to reaffirm the UA’s “commit[ment] to defending, celebrating and hosting free expression” served to calm those fears, from students and faculty alike.

However, in the press release announcing this decision, you also state “that the best course of action is to handle these incidents as possible Code of Conduct violations through the Dean of Students Office.” What we understand by this statement is simply the transfer of unwarranted charges of “chalking” against student activists Jacob Miller and Evan Lisull from the criminal-legal to the administrative arena. In so stating, you continue to commit yourself to treating the actions attributed to these students as punishable, though now within the jurisdiction of the Academic Code of Conduct rather than under criminal law. The very fact that these students continue to be disciplined, even if under a different system, simply perpetuates the incursion by this administration on the principles of free expression, free assembly, and shared governance. We find, ultimately, that this decision does not constitute a resolution to this recent assault on free expression at this University nor is it a restoration of the full protection of civil liberties granted to every individual of this academic community.

Further, we find, this disciplinary transfer actually increases, not reduces, the jeopardy faced by students. Under the criminal system, the University would be required to present evidence and witnesses for rebuttal and would be required to meet the threshold of proving the guilt of these students “beyond a reasonable doubt.” To date, UAPD has demonstrated no evidence that even approaches this threshold. (As of yet, no evidence beyond “unnamed sources” as been presented to actually tie these students to said infractions.) We note that the standard of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” does not exist for those charged in a Academic Code of Conduct hearing. Instead, the Dean of Students must merely determine that “it is more likely than not that a violation of a Student Code of Conduct has occurred” (5-403 (C) 6), and the students have no right during this procedure to challenge the purported witness(es) who are said to have contacted UAPD. The students only have the right to challenge these witnesses upon appeal to a University Hearing Board, but such appeals are limited to cases in which the Dean’s sanction involves “suspensions, expulsions, and degree revocations” (5-403 (D) 1). Thus, in transferring these charges to the Dean of Students, the administration has made it significantly more likely that these students will be found guilty and punished, whereas the criminal complaint would have most likely failed. This is no victory for sane or humane treatment of students.

Dr. Shelton, though we appreciate your decision to correct the course sparked by the incidents of last week, including the dropping of criminal charges against the students, as well as instructing the UAPD to “avoid citing individuals for criminal damage for similar future events,” we urge you also to reconsider the suggested administrative action against Mr. Miller, Mr. Lisull, and against any student facing a similar situation in the future. And finally, we ask you to renew in both speech and action your commitment to the principles of a truly public university, including freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and shared governance.

Faculty Signatures:

Abraham Acosta, Spanish and Portuguese
Jason Brown, Creative Writing Program
Maritza Cardenas, English
Jenn Croissant, Gender and Women's Studies
Adam Geary, Gender and Women's Studies
Roger Hartley, Government and Public Policy
Fenton Johnson, Creative Writing Program
John Paul Jones III, Geography and Development
Miranda Joseph, Gender and Women's Studies
Elizabeth Kennedy, Gender and Women's Studies
David Plane, Geography and Development
Marv Waterstone, Geography and Development