IP: ACLU Responds to Princeton "Clarification" of Internet

[Dave Farber <farber@central.cis.upenn.edu>]

Posted-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:49:22 -0400
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 20:45:09 GMT
Reply-To: roundtable@cni.org
Sender: owner-roundtable@cni.org
From: beeson@usa.pipeline.com (Ann Beeson)
To: Multiple recipients of list <roundtable@cni.org>
Subject: ACLU Responds to Princeton "Clarification" of Internet Censorship
Policy
X-To: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu, roundtable@cni.org
X-Pipeuser: beeson
X-Pipehub: usa.pipeline.com
X-Pipegcos: (Ann Beeson)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2 -- ListProcessor by CREN




AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION 
National Legal Department 
132 West 43rd Street 
New York, New York 10036 
(212) 944-9800 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
ACLU Responds to Princeton "Clarification" of Internet Censorship Policy: 
End It, Don't Mend It 
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE     
Friday, August 23, 1996   
 
Contact:  Ann Beeson, ACLU National, 212-944-9800, x788 
          David Rocah, ACLU of New Jersey, 201-642-2086 
      
   NEW YORK--The American Civil Liberties Union today criticized Princeton
University's "clarification" of its policy barring faculty, students and
staff from using the schools' computer network for "political purposes,"
calling on the university to rescind the ban. 
 
   The clarification  memo was issued after the ACLU contacted Princeton in
an August 15 letter, urging university officials to end its policy. 
According to the Princeton clarification, the policy was meant to prevent
students and staff from "personal use" of the network specifically for
"campaign activities." 
 
   In a follow-up letter sent today to Princeton officials, the ACLU said
the university's response "still falls short of constitutional
requirements," and would only serve to confuse the issue further."  The
letter was signed by Ann Beeson, ACLU national staff attorney and David
Rocah, staff attorney for the 
ACLU of New Jersey. 
 
   "The clarification is as clear as mud," said David Rocah.  "In fact, the
only thing that's clear about Princeton's policy is that it is still
unconstitutional."  Rocah said the policy violates free speech protections
in the New Jersey state constitution.    
 
   In its memo, issued late yesterday, Princeton conceded that the policy
was "overly broad," and stated that "students, faculty and staff are
generally free to communicate their personal views on political candidates
using e-mail and the Internet."   But officials once again cited the
university's not-for-profit status as a rationale for limiting speech,
warning that "the IRS may deem personal use of University resources for
campaign activities, including use of the Internet, to be political
campaign activity by the University itself." 
 
   That interpretation is still wrong, the ACLU countered.  "As we pointed
out in our initial letter, Internal Revenue Service rulings make clear that
only campaigning by Princeton officials on behalf of the university could
affect its tax-exempt status," said national staff attorney Ann Beeson. 
 
   "Just as students have traditionally distributed political campaign
material on the university commons, they have the right to send it through
the Internet," Beeson added.  "In fact, campaign literature is arguably the
most fundamental type of speech in our democratic system of government. 
There is nothing more important than choosing our political leaders and
knowing what they stand for." 
 
   The letter urged Princeton to resolve the issue quickly as the
presidential election approaches, and requested a meeting with Princeton
officials to discuss the matter further.  If the university refuses to drop
its censorship policy, the ACLU said it would consider legal action. 
 
Note to Editors:  The ACLU's August 23 letter to Princeton follows.  Please
contact our national press office at (212) 944-9800, ext. 414, for copies
of the ACLU's original August 15 letter and copies of the Princeton policy
memos.  To access this information online, visit the ACLU's website
<http://www.aclu.org> or America Online site (keyword: ACLU). 
 
-30- 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
TEXT OF LETTER FROM ACLU COUNSEL TO PRINCETON UNIVERSITY: 
 
August 23, 1996 
 
BY FACSIMILE, E-MAIL, & REGULAR MAIL 
 
Howard S. Ende 
Office of General Counsel 
120 Alexander Street, 2nd Floor 
Princeton, New Jersey 08544-2086 
 
     RE:  Computer Use Policy 
 
Dear Mr. Ende: 
 
We believe the clarification you issued yesterday regarding Princeton's
policy on use of the computer network for political purposes still falls
short of constitutional requirements.  We suggest a meeting with you and
President Shapiro to discuss the issue further; we are both available for a
meeting during the week of September 9 - 13. 
 
Specifically, the memo issued yesterday will further confuse Princeton
students and staff regarding their political speech rights on the computer
network, and thus will inhibit speech protected by the New Jersey State
Constitution.  The memo rightly concedes that the policy statement dated
July 19, 1996 is "overly broad," and that "students, faculty and staff are
generally free to communicate their person views on political candidates
using e-mail and the internet."  However, the memo goes on to state that
"Nonetheless, we continue to ask everyone to bear in mind that the IRS may
deem personal use of University resources for campaign activities,
including use of the internet, to be political campaign activity by the
University itself." 
 
This final sentence is inaccurate as a matter of law.  As stated in our
letter dated August 15, 1996, personal use of the network for "campaign
activities" is constitutionally protected political speech and in no way
threatens Princeton's tax-exempt status.  See ACLU Letter to Princeton,
8/15/96, at 2.  Because Princeton provides fair and equal access to the
computer network to all University members, and allows use of the network
for a variety of non-political purposes, the provision of computing
facilities to students and staff, even for campaigning activities, will not
jeopardize the university's 501(c)(3) status.  The computer network is
analogous to the Princeton commons, where university students and staff
have long been free to distribute and obtain campaign literature and to
encourage votes for particular political candidates.  The fact that this
activity is taking place on the computer network makes it no less protected
political speech.  In fact, campaign literature is arguably the most
fundamental type of speech in our democratic system of government.  There
is nothing more important in choosing our political leaders than knowing
what they stand for. 
 
The recent statement is also vague and fails to notify university members
clearly as to whether personal use of the network for "campaign activities"
is a violation of university policy.  In addition, the University now has
issued at least five separate policies and statements that govern use of
the computer network for political purposes: the August 22, 1996
clarification memorandum; the July 19, 1996 memorandum on "Internet use and
Policy;" the "Computer Use" guidelines at page 11 of the Rights, Rules,
Responsibilities handbook; the "Guidelines Relating to the Tax-Exempt
Status of the University and Political Activities," at pages 14-15 of the
Rights, Rules, Responsibilities handbook; and the 1995-96 "Guidelines for
use of Campus and Network Computing Resources."  These conflicting policies
and statements are sure to cause confusion among university members, which
will inhibit students and staff from exercising their right to free speech
on the computer network. 
 
If you continue to believe that 501(c)(3) restrictions prevent certain
political communications over computer networks, we urge you to seek an
advisory ruling on the matter from the Internal Revenue Service.  In the
meantime, all five policies and statements must be clearly and
unequivocally suspended, and a statement must be issued clarifying that all
university members and groups may engage in political speech and campaign
activities over the computer network so long as they do not purport to
speak for the university itself. 
 
Because we are nearing the end of an election year, it is crucial that this
matter be resolved quickly in order to ensure that Princeton students and
staff are able to exercise fully their political speech rights. 
 
Thank you for your prompt response to our prior letter and your willingness
to continue this important discussion. 
 
Very truly yours, 
 
Ann Beeson, Staff Attorney 
American Civil Liberties Union 
National Legal Department 
132 West 43rd Street 
New York, New York 10036 
(212) 944-9800 x788 
 
David Rocah, Staff Attorney 
American Civil Liberties Union 
  of New Jersey 
2 Washington Place 
Newark, NJ 07102 
(201) 642-2086 
 
 
cc:  President Harold Shapiro