Work at UNC system centers a matter of libertas, not liberals
The Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina would betray both a fundamental principle and its very duty if it shut down the UNC Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity and the UNC Center for Civil Rights. Members of the Board of Governors have made it clear that these two academic and programmatic centers of the UNC School of Law remain on the chopping block because of the liberal ideas the centers espouse.
Squashing free speech and expression in this way would be a grave mistake.
Notions of liberty embodied in the First Amendment, principles of academic freedom and the very motto of the University of North Carolina – Lux Libertas (light and liberty) – demand that elected officials and politically appointed bodies refrain generally from regulating speech at institutions of higher education and especially from singling out and crushing an institute because they don’t like what it says.
And, yes, these principles of liberty apply to a state university that is in some ways an instrument of government; in fact, they are amplified. Our universities are not merely government agencies administering a public policy that is subject to political tides; instead, they are chartered to fulfill a timeless charge that transcends partisan gamesmanship. Their missions require that they be bastions of free thought and expression and not the microphone of elected politicians or their political appointees. The centers in question are components of an educational ecosystem, and they are no more speaking for the State of North Carolina than the Daily Tar Heel, or a professor in the department of religion, or a student organization.
Moreover, these centers receive virtually no direct or indirect state support and survive almost exclusively on private funding. As a result, adverse action by the Board of Governors would have the additional effect of muzzling donors to the university (and in the age of Citizens United, no less). Why would donors want their legacy or the programs they support to be subject to sudden evaporation based on the results of an election? They may be liberal donors today, but they will be conservative donors tomorrow. That’s the thing about betraying a fundamental principle – the ongoing negative effects have no party affiliation, and no political party will have the courage to rebottle that genie once given the chance to use it.
In dealing with controversial speech, the appropriate response is not to suppress it, but to foster more speech. Don’t agree with Gene Nichol? Start a center at any number of schools to elevate different viewpoints. (I daresay finding a donor wouldn’t be that difficult.) Then, let the ideals do battle in the law school rotunda, across the campus and throughout the entire state. Imagine the value to the students and citizens of North Carolina of listening to and participating in a spirited, high-quality debate on the fundamental questions of our time. Isn’t that one of the basic tenets of higher education? And of liberty?
Which brings us to the shame of the current situation. The Board of Governors – the highest governing body overseeing a crown jewel of our state – is poised to betray a fundamental principle for political gain and at the peril of the university it has a duty to steward. Thankfully, it still has time to reconsider this direction and to act in accordance with a greater, more lasting mission, rather than an expedient partisan purpose.
Ed Chaney is a double Tar Heel and attorney in Chapel Hill.
This story was originally published February 13, 2015 at 6:56 PM with the headline "Work at UNC system centers a matter of libertas, not liberals."