Editorial: And Then There Were Three

In March of this year, more than 100 students filled the lobby of Sproul Hall to protest the beginning of the attack on Iraq, until students were escorted out, some forcibly, by police.

Nearly 120 were arrested, but the police dropped all charges.

The university was not so lenient. Earlier this week, a campus committee found three of the event's main organizers, Michael Smith, Snehal Shingavi and Rachel Odes, guilty of disturbing the peace.

If the university believes that what Smith, Shingavi and Odes did was a serious disturbance on campus, they should also charge all the students who played an equally important role in halting business in the administrative building during the sit-in.

But by picking out only three, the message sent from the university seems to be that free speech includes the right to participate in a protest, but not the right to organize one. If this is the case, then the office of Student Judicial Affairs serves only as a more institutional version of the police forces that swarmed the steps of Sproul 40 years ago.

The explanation for prosecuting the three students-each had a record of student conduct charges-is unsatisfactory. One's conduct history should not make those people more guilty than others in a new and unrelated activity.

Never willing to miss an opportunity to make a statement, the three stormed out before presenting their own defense. While the move is slightly disappointing, the students were well aware that their fates had already been sealed.

Specific disciplinary action now rests in the hands of Dean of Students Karen Kenney, whose greatest strength is hearing the voice many students feel is neglected by the administration. We hope she recognizes disciplinary action against these three will shape how all students view their right to protest on campus.

Tags: