The Michigan chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has sent a letter to Oakland University, warning the school that its policy of preventing student athletes from speaking to the media about a former coach may be unconstitutional.
The ACLU sent the letter on September 12 to Interim President Betty Youngblood and Athletic Director Tracy Huth.
The Michigan chapter’s staff attorney, Brooke Tucker, told the student newspaper at the school that there had been no reply, but that she was “hopeful” one would be forthcoming.
“We remain hopeful that no further action will be necessary, that given the recent incidence where lack of transparency has allowed abuse and suffering by players to continue for long periods of time that Oakland University will decide the best thing to protect their players and protect other students … is to be transparent,” she said.
The origins of the dispute stemmed from the firing, with cause, of former coach Beckie Francis, amid allegations that she discriminated against players. One former player claimed that Francis “routinely” discriminated against her Muslim beliefs.
Conceding that the matter was one of “intense public concern,” ACLU suggested in the letter that “transparency and openness about past transgressions, if any, can lead to positive change where future instances of abuse are less likely.”
Oakland University Athletics maintains a policy that requires students and employees to gain permission from the communications director before talking to the media. “Oakland University has, in essence, created a limited public forum for this type of communication,” according to the ACLU. “A school cannot deny access to a limited public forum simply because it dislikes the speaker’s viewpoint on a particular issue.”
The letter continued:
“The only way the Communications Department can constitutionally prevent questioning or comments on the Beckie Francis matter is if the school has a reasonable [sic] belief that such questioning or comments will cause a substantial disruption to the … educational environment. NO such belief is possible in this case … Any such concern [about questioning or comments disrupting the educational environment] would be greatly outweighed by the importance of ensuring that students are able to attend and participate in extracurricular activities free from abuse and discrimination.
“We believe that transparency and openness about past transgressions, if any, can lead to positive change where future instances are less likely.”
The student newspaper asked Jane Briggs-Bunting, a media attorney and president of the Michigan Coalition for Open Government, to comment on the ACLU’s argument.
“I absolutely agree that gagging OU athletes and/or threatening them with some sort of reprisal if they speak to the media about Coach Francis, her termination, her coaching style or that of her successor is a clear violation of the First Amendment’s free speech provisions, and the U.S. Supreme Court, in a series of decisions, supports this position,” she said.
“Despite that, I suspect OU will continue to “encourage’ students not to respond and will claim the university is not preventing them from talking,” she said.
