Melissa Overbeck
Assitant Perspectives Editor
For generations freedom has been a driving factor in the advancement of the human condition. It is the principle on which our country was founded and a principle that continues to shape our society and culture. It is the right of every man, woman and child to realize his or her dreams without interference or fear — the right of citizens to be themselves. It is a concept that framed the history and purpose of our nation and revolutionized the world’s idea of government. It has created an ideological revolution that is spreading throughout the world. However, this revolution has sadly not yet reached Pepperdine.
New students are immediately confronted with the University’s disregard for individual liberties when they sign away their Fourth Amendment rights against search and seizure in the Pepperdine contract.
At first glance, this seems insignificant — Pepperdine is after all a private institution, and even the arbitary is acceptable when it comes to setting most standards.
The private institution explanation does not, however, make it right.
Is it even possible to sign away a Constitutional privilege, especially without due process? Can the University create a piece of paper that has more weight than the supreme law of the land? More importantly, even if it can, is it right for the University to do so?
It seems only decent that at an institution of higher learning there would be a profound respect for individual liberty, enlightenment ideology and the fundamental ideals of a free society. These are the things we learn about in our classrooms and the truths we hold dear as Americans and citizens of the world. The revolution toward freedom should flourish at a place where students come to build strong minds and sound souls.
While the University professes to encourage students in the free pursuit of truth, that pursuit is limited by a number of Pepperdine policies. The First Amendment guarantees the right to peaceably assemble, yet the administration only allows students to assemble if their group is recognized by the University. According to the student handbook (page 10), students can receive disciplinary sanctions for participation in student organizations not recognized by the University. Thus, we only have the freedom to assemble with others who share our beliefs if the University also shares those beliefs. Not to mention, freedom of expression is somewhat confined to a small bulletin board outside the cafeteria.
It is highly unlikely that there will ever be a sign posted in the Quad expressing an opinion or supporting a group not officially recognized by the University, at least not one bearing the required Student Activities stamp.
Aside from First Amendment issues, interesting questions arise from the treatment of students by Public Safety. DPS officers have relatively unchecked police power over students. They can search rooms without notice or without a resident being present. A specially trained officer can force a student to submit to a breathalyzer test, even if that student is not driving a vehicle, and even with only minimal suspicion. Refusal could result in disciplinary action. Public Safety officers can also detain students for unspecified periods of time. Officers can use handcuffs to detain students, which seems like an abuse of power in a place like Pepperdine.
These University-imposed limits on freedom extend outside Pepperdine’s gates. As the student handbook explains, Pepperdine maintains the right to impose its regulations on students for their actions on or off University property. Aside from being an unbelievable attack on privacy, one must ask where the University finds such jurisdiction.
Off-campus, students are no longer on private property or within the University’s immediate sphere of influence. Thus, Pepperdine should have no cause for disciplinary action. Violations of principle should be matters of personal concern and violations of law should be of governmental concern. It is one thing when personal actions result in a felony, which can and should be grounds for disciplinary action by the University. It is another thing when it comes to conduct subjectively deemed unacceptable by Pepperdine. Punishing students or staff for off-campus actions or behaviors that are not illegal is an inexcusable violation of an individual’s right to privacy and a blatant disregard for the laws and institutions of our state and country.
There have been some efforts to extend Constitutional privileges to private university students. In 1992, California passed the Leonard Law, which gives relief to any student who is subjected to or disciplined under a rule that restricts speech, communication or any other First Amendment right. The law is a positive step toward protecting the individual liberties of students who are paying for a service, much like HIPPA laws have extended certain privacy guarantees to individuals paying for medical services.
There are many other ways private institutions can be required to submit to federal and state law. The most well-known of these are, of course, the requirements placed upon universities that accept a certain, or any, level of government funding including federal financial aid for students. Schools that accept such funding are required by law to meet certain standards, offer certain programs or implement specific policies, such as those associated with affirmative action.
It is hard to understand how a university can accept any level of public funding and not respect the will of the people and the Constitution. Are affirmative action programs more important than ensuring free speech, equal protection and even a minimum standard of privacy? It is only logical that nothing is more important than ensuring that our students — our future leaders in industry and government — are awarded the protections guaranteed to them by the Constitution so that they may learn and respect the promise and hope it brings to so many people.
Every citizen owes a solid commitment to our principles in all that we do, and there is no better place to share in the freedom and liberty granted to us than at our university. The university is, after all, not only a place where thoughts should be communicated and developed, but it is a place where revolutionary ideas and ideals can take hold. Hopefully someday Pepperdine’s administration will share this same vision.
Perspectives Assistant Scott Withycombe contributed to this article.
09-16-2004