Chapman University students are raising concerns administrators are trying to infringe on their first amendment rights by taking disciplinary action against students who spoke at a recent protest to demand the university protect the diversity, equity and inclusion office.
[Read: Chapman Students Walkout Demanding University Protect Diversity, Equity & Inclusion]
The concerns are part of mounting worries on whether college campuses across America – which have historically been places to practice civil disobedience – will continue to be venues where students can peacefully protest and challenge political ideas and laws without facing disproportionate repercussions.
It comes in the aftermath of police and universities clearing out and grappling with pro-Palestinian encampments that popped up at campuses in recent years after a surprise Hamas attack on Israel in 2023 triggered Israeli Defense Forces to launch retaliatory attacks in Gaza.
It also comes amid a federal immigration crackdown under a new presidential administration that has swept up international and immigrant students, like former Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil and Columbia student Mohsen Mahdawi, who have helped lead and participate in the demonstrations.
These recent actions are sparking a debate across the U.S. on whether First Amendment rights apply to non-citizens in the only country in the world where freedom of speech is the first right protected under the founding governing charter.
At the same time, federal officials say they have the power to deport students who they believe pose a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests and support groups deemed by the government as terrorist organizations.
Federal education leaders are also threatening to pull funding from universities they say have failed to protect Jewish students and combat anti-Semitism during the rise in pro-Palestinian activism across the country in recent years.
David Loy, legal director for the First Amendment Coalition, said the government should never take action against a person for the content of their speech.
“The First Amendment applies to everyone, US citizens or otherwise and the government should never be taking action because someone doesn’t like what people have to say. That, in my view, is unconstitutional retaliation based on the viewpoint of speech,” Loy said.
He adds that such actions could have a chilling effect on what people say.
At the same time, Loy said universities are not necessarily deemed a traditional public forum – where the government has less leeway to regulate speech – and blocking off access to buildings is not a constitutional right and could come with consequences.
“Regardless of your viewpoint, you’re not allowed to block people’s access to buildings. You’re not allowed to occupy,” he said.
Loy said there is also no constitutional right to build an encampment.
“If people do that, and whether the city or the university or whatever has prohibited the sort of construction of structures, on university property, that’s a restriction on time, place and manner. It’s not a restriction on viewpoint assuming that it is, in fact, enforced equally across the board.”
Regardless, Loy said consequences for breaking the rules or engaging in civil disobedience should be proportional to the violation.
Lisa Leitz, Chair of the Department of Peace Studies at Chapman University, said since the 1960s students have fought for freedom of speech on campuses, pointing to the free speech movement at UC Berkeley.
“That led to students really having what we now think of as campus free speech rights, and some of the early protests on campus, it was really important for the anti-Vietnam movement, women’s movement and all that good stuff,” she said in an interview.
It’s not just in America.
Students across the world have historically pushed for change whether its Burmese students protesting a military junta or students occupying Tiananmen Square in China in the late 80s, students pushing for Freedom of Speech in Iran in 1999 or more recently the Arab Spring that kicked off in 2011 fueled by students demanding democracy across North Africa and the Middle East.
Leitz worries that attempts to limit student speech outside the classroom will impact a student’s ability to speak up in the classroom and challenge ideas.
“I don’t think that we do a good job without having real free speech on a campus that means inside and outside the classroom and in all of its ugly and sometimes complicated forms,” she said. “As long as it’s peaceful.”
Leitz said college is often the first time students speak out on issues they care about, adding that no matter their political views they shouldn’t be punished.
“It’s really important that people are allowed to engage.”
A Chapman Policy & The Fear of Retaliation
Last month, Chapman’s student newspaper – The Panther – reported that four students received formal disciplinary warnings and another student received two conduct violations for using an “amplified sound” device at a March 17 protest, violating a university’s policy.
The policy forbids students from using a megaphone or any amplified sound device in outdoor areas during the weekdays “that could disturb classes, University business, or nearby residents of Orange.”
The rules – updated in the wake of a pro-Palestinian encampment on campus last year – also requires any use of an amplified sound device to be approved by university staff and forbids encampments.
Around 9:30 am Wednesday, about 20 students and faculty members with black tape around their lips held a silent protest on campus in an effort to get administrators to revoke the disciplinary actions against the five students and to revisit the policy with their input.
Students who spoke to the Voice of OC did so on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliatory disciplinary action from university officials.
They say that administrators are enforcing the policy in a biased and discriminatory fashion – pointing to the five students being subjected to disciplinary hearings in April and administrators trying to identify more students to punish.
“Those hearings seem to have been executed onto students on a selective basis of use of the policy, despite other events, organizations, students, individuals, faculty, doing similar things, not involved with free speech protest or demonstrative protest,” one student said.
“Our hope is that through this protest, we can ensure that there is a student backing for free speech on our campus.”
The student said the university is infringing on students’ first amendment rights.
“To silence students by intimidating them with a policy that was amended around free speech protest in order to make them feel like free speech is daunting, I think is an infringement on free speech,” the student said.
Another student, a Peace & Justice Studies major, also said the policy is targeting free speech and should be revised with input from students and faculty members.
“What we want to see is that those charges be dropped from those students that have been affected by it, and then also that the administration agrees to go work and revise this policy, both with our student government as well as with the Faculty Senate.” the student said in a phone interview.
“This is our first step in trying to target this policy in particular so that moving forward, students have more freedom in negotiating with the administration and academic freedom on campus as well.”
An online petition calling for revisions of the policy and for no disciplinary actions against the five students has garnered over 50 signatures as of Wednesday.
The faculty senate at Chapman also approved a statement last month against taking disciplinary action against the students being reprimanded and calling on the policy to be revised.
“It appears that some selectivity has been employed in which individuals are charged and under which policy,” reads the April 16 statement.
“The Chapman Faculty Senate respectfully requests that the Chapman University Administration revise the Facility Use Policy and Event Policy in order to more clearly allow for student and faculty expressions of free speech and that Faculty and students be involved in the re-writing of this policy. Additionally, we request no action be taken against any individuals for having spoken on March 17, 2025, due to ‘amplified sound.’”
Jeff Howard, a spokesperson for the university, said in an email last week that Chapman fully supports free speech including peaceful protests as well as welcomes diverse viewpoints.
“Free speech and academic freedom are hallmarks of Chapman University—ideals that we uphold and practice every day in our classrooms, in our halls, in our centers and institutes, and across our campuses,” Howard wrote. “We encourage and nurture civil discourse.”
“We have an important role to play in this regard, as an educational institution, and our policies aim to provide opportunities for everyone.”
Howard also said the rule applies to all student groups and clubs when asked if the university has enforced the amplified sound policy before against other students for different incidents.
“Groups are reminded of the policy if they do not have prior approval for amplified sound,” he said.
Across from the protest, about three university public safety officers watched from afar. The entrance of Memorial Hall was blocked off with barricades.
Leitz said she is concerned with the university taking action against students for peacefully speaking out and with the presence of the barricade and security at Wednesday’s protest.
“I think it shows the power of speech and even silent speech, that it scares the university this much that they have to make sure we’ve got our police and leaders and we’ve got our barricades,” she said
Leitz said this is the first time she saw administrators individually charge students for breaking the code and that two faculty members who spoke at the March 17 protest got referred to the human resources department.
Loy said Chapman is a private university and the first amendment does not guarantee a right to protest at any place, time or in any manner which private and government entities can regulate as long as it doesn’t target a specific viewpoint.
At the same time, Loy pointed to a section of the state’s education code dubbed the Leonard Law which prohibits private universities from making or enforcing rules that subject students to punishment solely on the basis of their speech.
“On its face, that sounds like a time, place and manner restriction,” Loy said about the amplified sound policy. “One could imagine there could potentially be valid reasons for that.”
But he also said if the rule wasn’t enforced across the board it would be a problem.
“If the university was only enforcing it against a protest and not against a party or a concert, or whatever blasting their music, that’s a problem because it suggests that it’s being selectively enforced based on viewpoint,” Loy said.
Protests & Protection
Since the fall of 2023, universities across the country – including Chapman and UC Irvine – have experienced a surge in pro-Palestinian protests and Gaza solidarity encampments.
About a year ago, UC Irvine became one of the political flashpoints with the start of an encampment.
Weeks laters, police officers in riot gear from a host of local law enforcement agencies cracked down on the encampment at UC Irvine and arrested dozens of people after ordering them to disperse.
In September, Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer filed misdemeanor charges against two UCI professors and four students who participated in the protest in spring.
Meanwhile, Groups like the Brandeis Center are concerned that colleges like Chapman University have not been doing enough to protect Jewish students in the midst of protests and are calling on the federal government to step in at several universities.
Last year, the group filed a complaint with the Department of Education alleging Chapman University failed to protect Jewish students from discrimination.
The complaint alleges the University’s chapter of the Students for Justice in Palestine denied membership to Jewish students if they didn’t reject support for Israel and that one student received a death threat for one of the group’s members.
Leaders with the student group have previously denied those allegations.
Last month, it seemed on-campus student protests were going to gain momentum again at Chapman after administrators decided to put one of the leaders of the university’s Diversity Equity and Inclusion office on leave without explanation.
Outgoing University President Daniele Struppa announced the decision in a March email to faculty – two days after the U.S. Department of Education officials warned dozens of universities – including Chapman University – they’d take action against them if they don’t do more to protect Jewish students after pro-Palestinian campus protests.
In response, hundreds of students and faculty members walked out in protest on March 17 demanding to know why the decision was made and to call on administrators to protect the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion office and protect immigrant students from deportation.
Since the March 17 protest, it was announced that three international students had their visas revoked, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion office has been dismantled and reorganized and the university held disciplinary hearings against students.
Now, protests at Chapman seem to be shrinking in size.
Leitz and the students say attendance at recent demonstrations has dwindled after students faced disciplinary action for the March 17 protest because of fear of retaliation.
The Peace & Justice student said the disciplinary action against the students is a big part in why attendance has dropped.
“That definitely makes people more hesitant to speak out on campus, knowing that the university doesn’t necessarily support them,” the student said.
The other student said less people are coming to the protests because they are scared, especially international students.
“You can’t come out and protest, if you feel that you’re targeted by the Trump administration and you’re now targeted by your university,” the student said.
“We don’t think Chapman as a private university is doing all that they can to protect us despite the resources they have.”
Leitz said the one thing administrators should do now is clear.
“Listen to your students.”
Hosam Elattar is a Voice of OC reporter and corps member with Report for America, a GroundTruth initiative. Contact him at helattar@voiceofoc.org or on Twitter @ElattarHosam.
Erika Taylor is a Voice of OC Tracy Wood Reporting Fellow and photojournalist. You can find her on Instagram @camerakeepsrolling or email at etaylor@voiceofoc.org.