University may review protest regulations

Princeton alumnus Bob Bloom '51 has suggested changes to the University's protest policy as a result of his own protesting experience on campus last winter.

On Feb. 20, when Colin Powell was scheduled to speak at the University for a symposium, Bloom said he stood outside Alexander Hall, holding up a three-by-five-foot sign calling Powell a liar and a war criminal. He said a Public Safety officer and his superior approached him and ordered him to stop protesting. However, Bloom refused to move.

He said later that day he returned to Alexander Hall to protest during Powell's departure. Bloom said, at this point, a State Department security officer blocked his path to Powell.

Bloom, who said he previously received permission from President Tilghman to protest, was outraged that Public Safety would deny him this right and requested a change in the University's protest policy.

Peter McDonough, University counsel, said the final section of "Rights, Rules, Responsibilities" establishes Princeton's regulations governing solicitation and distribution.

Currently, nonmembers of the University community who wish to protest must request permission from the University and are only allowed to protest at certain times and locations.

Last July, Bloom sent a letter to Tilghman proposing amendments to the policy, which he said he views as too restrictive. After some delay due to an administrative miscommunication, Bloom received a response from McDonough, who supported Bloom's revisions.

"Mr. Bloom has suggested that it might be helpful for University members to review what's currently in our rules, and I agree," McDonough said.

The first concern that Bloom communicated to McDonough was that the current rules apply only to groups and do not adequately address how to deal with individual protestors.

His main complaint, however, was that the rules are too restrictive. By limiting the times and locations for protesting, the University is restricting freedom of speech, Bloom said.

"Anyone should have a right to protest, as long as they're peaceful. There shouldn't be limitation as to place or amount of people," he said.

If Bloom's suggestions are implemented, this would not be the first time the University has amended its protesting regulations.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

As a result of a 1980 court case ruling, the University reformed its protest policy to allow for peaceful protesters. The case, State v. Schmid, involved two men arrested for distributing leaflets on campus. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled against the University on the grounds of freedom of speech and assembly.

Bloom called these previous reforms "cosmetic changes" that still restricted protesters and freedom of speech. He has proposed more dramatic changes.

Bloom and McDonough have discussed his recommendations extensively. "Mr. Bloom and I have talked about potential modifications to the processes and restrictions that appear in 'Rights, Rules, Responsibilities,'" McDonough said.

Although Bloom wanted to enact the changes before the 2004 election, McDonough explained that first they needed to be submitted to a committee of the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC).

Ann Halliday, CPUC secretary, said if the Executive Committee of the CPUC decides that an issue concerns the behavior of all members of the Princeton community and warrants discussion, it would ask the Rights and Rules Committee to review it. McDonough said it is likely Bloom's recommendations will go on to that committee.

Halliday said, "The Rights and Rules Committee would arrange to meet, would review the reforms and make a report in which they recommend action or recommend no action."

History professor Hendrik Hartog chairs the Rights and Rules committee — composed of at least one other faculty member, about two graduate students and two undergraduates, as well as ex-officio administration members.

The committee does not have regular meeting times and Halliday said it might be hard to get the committee together before spring term to discuss Bloom's proposed reforms.

McDonough said this process happens frequently. "Every year there are aspects of 'Rights, Rules, Responsibilities' that are modified, so it's very common for the Rights and Rules Committee to take issues up," he said.

However, McDonough said not all amendments are sent to the Rights and Rules subcommittee of the CPUC. For example, changes to the Honor Code would be dealt with by the Honor Committee.

Bloom said he wants to be involved in revising the University's protest rules, even if he does not serve on the Rights and Rules committee.

"I would like to be part of the process, at least testify in front of [the committee], because I want to have an influence," he said.

Bloom's eagerness to reform the rules arose from his anger about his experience last winter.

"My constitutional rights were denied by Princeton. If I don't get satisfaction in terms of changes to the 'Rights, Rules, Responsibilities,' I'm going to sue," he said.