Admin at MTU subverts student self-governance
Michigan Tech Administration overrules student body decision, says not funding conservative speaker is a violation of free speech
On Friday, a special meeting was convened at the request of University Administration to overturn the Undergraduate Student Government’s (USG) decision to deny a funding request of $3,500 to partially cover a $10,000 conservative speaker’s fee.
USG had previously voted down the request at their Wednesday meeting, citing high student opposition to funding the speaker as well as safety concerns for minority students who were the target of bigoted rhetoric espoused by the speaker. University administration offered an ultimatum to USG to either change their decision or be overruled. USG, in blatant defiance of administration, voted down the funding request a second time.
The Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students issued a Memorandum directing USG to transfer the $3,500 immediately to the student organization hosting the speaker. The University Administration justified their actions, stating that USG had violated the speaker's first amendment rights in making their decision to not fund the event.
Leading up to this outcome was a week bustling with student activism, social media pressure, procedural controversy, and appeals to precedent across the University.
The week began relatively quietly, with students circulating a petition Monday afternoon on social media to “Tell USG @ MTU to vote no on funding TPUSA event”.
Information on Turning Point USA (TPUSA) from Influence Watch.
Students assembled in the audience on Wednesday for the Undergraduate Student Government meeting. Photo by Juxta Sprague.
The petition argued “TPUSA and its leaders have a history of spreading hate, disinformation, and dubious rhetoric at college campuses across the country.” and that “This money should be used to help other organizations on campus that do not have the same national funding as TPUSA.”
The petition encouraged students to contact their representatives and to show up to USG’s Wednesday meeting to voice their opposition to providing funding, and ultimately garnered 283 signatures.
Early Tuesday morning, a counter petition was circulated by the president of Michigan Tech’s student chapter for TPUSA, the host for conservative speaker Brandon Tatum set to visit the University in late March. The petition “BE BRAVE with Brandon Tatum Opportunity Fund Request Support” stated that they were hosting a “NON-PARTISAN event for freedom of speech where ALL STUDENTS on campus are welcome”.
The petition listed the anticipated breakdown in funding for the $10,000 event including grants from their parent organization, TPUSA (40%), student funding from USG (35%), and grants from The Leadership Institute (20%). The remaining 5% was to be covered by “funds from local business owners” (2%) and “fundraising via grassroots (can drive etc)” (3%).
The petition also stated that “There is a current push by a small group of people that do not want us to receive the funding in order to fulfill our contractual obligations to Brandon Tatum and his team.” implying that members of the student chapter had signed a legally binding document with the speaker prior to securing funding.
Late Tuesday evening, Brandon Tatum tweeted “The Crazy Leftist Diversity Inclusion Crowd at Michigan Technological Institute is trying to BLOCK a black man from speaking and I need your help!” before sharing the counter petition to his nearly 690,000 followers.
In a video Tatum published Wednesday morning titled “What They WON’T TELL YOU About the Michigan State Shooting”, he replaced his usual sales pitch for his merchandise store with a plea to his 2.2 million subscribers to sign the counter petition.
“We need more than 2,000 signatures to show that we ain’t putting up with that BS! Let’s come together, let’s fight back! I want to go to Michigan and show these leftists that there’s another perspective to this game and we ain’t playing with them.”
Within 36 hours, the counter petition had garnered well over 6,000 signatures. At time of publishing, the counter petition is still live and is nearing 9,000 signatures.
Michigan Tech’s website states that there are currently 7,009 undergraduate and graduate students attending the university.
Late Wednesday evening, Michigan Tech's USG gathered for their weekly meeting. The audience gallery was packed with over two-dozen students, in stark contrast to their typically quiet meetings. Eleven students delivered prepared public comments, one in support, and ten in opposition to the funding request.
Caleb Glenn, president of Michigan Tech’s TPUSA chapter, spoke first, “We are hosting a non-partisan event regarding free speech for all. All students are welcome to attend. […] We think that having Brandon Tatum on campus is going to elevate the level of free speech on campus, and we're going to get a lot of discourse, which is always good.”
The ten other speakers identified themselves largely as members of the queer community, environmentalists, or proxy spokespersons/representatives for other students who could not attend or wished to remain anonymous.
One student who identified himself as a trans man explained his experience on campus.
“I’ve been called homophobic slurs by my fellow students, and I’ve felt threatened at times,” he said.
In reference to one of Brandon Tatum’s videos, he said that “[Brandon Tatum] states that trans girls using locker rooms are creepy, weird, and stupid. […] and also suggested that gay athletes should keep quiet about their sexuality so that they don’t make their teammates uncomfortable.”
Kieran Rowan, co-president of Keweenaw Pride the LGBTQIA+ and Straight Ally student organization of Michigan Tech, began by citing the University’s diversity and inclusion statement to USG before contrasting it with comments made by Brandon Tatum.
“Brandon Tatum has repeatedly made remarks in the past that invalidate the identities of LGBTQIA individuals including that we are ‘abnormal’ and ‘on the wrong side of Christ.’ These types of comments are incredibly hurtful and directly opposed to that idea of a ‘mutual and respectful’ conversation. [...] We want to feel supported by the university and for that we don’t want to feel like our rights are opinions. We want to feel like our rights are human rights.”
Several staff members of the university also weighed in during the discussion.
Laura Putwen, Director of the office of Community Conduct, delivered a summary of a conversation that she had with Michigan Tech general counsel.
“While you all were discussing, I was on the phone with our general counsel. Funding a speaker is funding a speaker. The University as a public institution is not going to say ‘No, you can not come to this institution’ in terms of using our space. Now we might say you can’t be in a certain space, ‘you can go to this space but not this space’ so there are guidelines and limits we can do, but there are laws that we have to follow.”
Danielle Meirow, Assistant Director of Leadership and Involvement as well as an advisor to USG, delivered an official statement to the USG prepared by MTU Marketing and Communications. All attempts to contact staff at the University were redirected to a written copy of the same statement.
One of the most important and exciting things about being on a University campus is the opportunity to experience situations that encourage growth and stretch us out of our comfort zone. Speakers and events that express opinions and ideologies different from our own are an opportunity to learn, to seek understanding, and further develop our own views.
As an institution, Michigan Tech fully supports free speech, which includes protecting the ability of speakers to express what may be considered unpopular views on campus, as well as ensuring others are welcome to criticize and contest those views. However, those criticizing speech cannot interfere with the speaker's ability to share their ideas. Undergraduate Student Government through the SAF [Student Activity Fee] has precedent for funding speakers with a variety of views and has an obligation to follow that precedent. Not passing this opportunity fund request purely based on the expected content from the speaker would be hindering free speech on campus.
I am proud of everyone for being here to participate in a democratic process. I hope you continue doing so as we move through the rest of the semester. Student Leadership and Involvement is available and willing to assist with any conversations regarding additional events on campus.
Dean of Students and advisor to USG, Dr. Wallace Southerland, offered no comment during the vote proceedings.
After more than 50 minutes of discussion, the funding request failed, falling just short of the two-thirds majority requirement.
Despite the successful efforts of many students to lobby their representatives to vote against the funding request, the university quickly found itself mired in controversy. USG was forced to convene a special meeting by administrators Friday afternoon to “align [their] vote with state law, board policy, and university values.”
The meeting was publicly announced less than five hours beforehand and stated “no public comment will take place, though the public may attend if they wish to.”
The general counsel of Michigan Tech, Sarah Schulte, explained that USG could either change their vote to fully fund the $3,500 request or that the administration would overrule and provide the funding without their consent. Schulte stated that USG had made a decision “due to the viewpoint of the speaker” and as such was in “direct contravention to the first amendment.”
Many representatives expressed grave concerns about the secretive and undemocratic nature of the meeting, which disregarded the voices of the student body. Others advocated that it was USG’s duty to uphold precedent and approve the funding request as demanded by administration.
Ben Conlin delivers his remarks at Friday’s meeting. Sitting behind and to the right is Sarah Schulte, university general council. Photo by Juxta Sprague.
College of Computing representative Ben Conlin, a recent addition to the body, offered his comment to explain his vote.
“I’m brand new to USG, this is my [second] meeting so I kinda want to tell a little bit of my story and why I voted the way I did. [...] I’m a member of the Political Affairs committee and my current project is planning the candlelight vigil to honor the lives [lost in] the MSU shooting. I grew up in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the site of the recent Club Q shooting. [...] I held my best friend in my arms as they sobbed fearing the world that hunted people like them. I had a friend commit suicide because they were forced by family, church, and advisors to hide who they were, choosing death over the world they had been born into. [...] It feels like we have been told we cannot vote no, and I fear that I cannot vote yes, because my heart hurts too deeply for the community that is marginalized and threatened.”
Fourth year student representative Griffin Abbott, stated that, “At Wednesday’s meeting we had students, including representatives from the body of LGBTQIA at this university crying and begging us to consider their safety in this matter. [...] If we are to stay entirely content-neutral in all matters, how far does that go? We have seen students pointing out the lack of consideration for the humanity of trans and gay students. What other protected classes are we willing to allow speakers to come and spew their hatred about on this campus?”
Emily Ruf, treasurer of USG, who made the initial funding recommendation of $3,500 delivered a prepared statement explaining why she was changing her vote from yes to no.
“Forcing the USG body to overturn this decision goes against the will of this body and the desires of our constituents who are paying customers of this university. The primary argument for my vote on this matter is procedural consistency. [...] Administrators asking USG to revote on a decision essentially in secret, without public comment, against the will of their constituents is not consistent with our normal procedure. [...] Many student members of this community shared deeply personal stories in front of a nerve-wrackingly large group of people in hopes of swaying this body. They should not have had to undergo that highly stressful situation for it to mean absolutely nothing to that outcome. I am voting no on this motion because I believe the decision at last Wednesday’s meeting was final. I am urging members of this body to vote no on this motion.”
The vote to approve the funding request failed a second time. The Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students issued a Memorandum directing USG to transfer the $3,500 immediately to the TPUSA student organization for them to pay Brandon Tatum.