Editor's note: All opinions, columns and letters reflect the views of the individual writer and not necessarily those of the IDS or its staffers.
On May 29, 2025, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction to IU’s new expressive activity policy, UA-10, determining it to be “likely unconstitutional". The ruling comes after months of opposition to the policy in the form of lawsuits and protests — the latter often occurring in purposeful violation of the policy.
The ruling on UA-10 comes as no surprise to many organizers on campus, as it imposes blatantly overbroad time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech where the First Amendment demands narrow tailoring.
Violating the Constitution of the United States is a serious affront to students, faculty, and staff and to the integrity of this university as a premier public institution of higher education. And as a member of IU Student Government who has worked toward creating a more inclusive, transparent and democratic IU, listening to students guides my philosophy to serve. Therefore, it would truly be a disservice to overlook the pattern of malicious disregard university leaders display for the IU community and pretend these actions are inconsistent with past stances IU leadership has taken.
IU leadership continuously violates their own policies and circumvents the core tenet of shared governance they pledge to uphold — which ensures students, faculty and staff all have a seat at the table — all for the comfort of convenience. When the kitchen gets hot, the Whitten administration and the Board abandon any notion of what should be the true mission of IU: promoting the public good through transformative education, groundbreaking research and the development of society — all which necessitate academic freedom and freedom of speech — benefiting those in the IU community, state and beyond.
—
To say these past few years under the Whitten administration have been a disaster for the mission and reputation of IU would be an understatement. It has been demoralizing, frustrating and nearly impossible to watch our institution shrink away from its former legacy as an unflinching heavyweight in the pursuit of knowledge — formerly pioneering the likes of the Kinsey Institute, building the largest foreign language program in the country and taking pride in the free exchange of ideas.
However, with recent unilateral and seemingly fear-driven decisions, Whitten and her administration have shown a frustrating lack of respect for democratic decision-making on campus, often at the expense of the very mission they’re meant to spearhead.
We’ve seen it in the concerning weaponization of and confusion regarding SEA 202 policies, the detrimental cuts to the Center for Research on Race and Ethnicity in Society and the alarming centralization slashing through different majors and programs in the name of austerity.
Moreover, a central grievance cited by opponents of Whitten and her administration involves the Indiana Graduate Workers Coalition. Despite the backing of most graduate workers and a supermajority vote in support of recognizing the graduate workers’ union by the Bloomington Faculty Council, the Coalition has failed to gain recognition by the university, prompting IU community members to question the university’s commitment to its students’ well-being and to shared governance.
Additionally, in December 2023, IU administration unilaterally suspended a tenured professor without due process and in violation of IU policy. The suspension came at a time when IU was under pressure by then-Representative and now-Senator Jim Banks to crack down on antisemitic activities on campus — emphasizing the eradication of pro-Palestinian activity.
The same month, IU canceled Palestinian American, IU alum, and former IU tenured professor Samia Halaby’s art exhibit less than 2 months before it was set to open after being planned for 3 years due to vague security concerns and the artist’s pro-Palestinian social media posts.
And shamefully, the night before the encampment, IU Provost Rahul Shrivastav convened an ad hoc committee without student input to amend the 1969 Dunn Meadow policy and disallow temporary structures without prior approval, paving the way for the Indiana State Police to intimidate, brutalize, arrest, and trespass dozens of students, faculty, and staff.
In the aftermath of the administration’s catastrophic mishandling of the encampment, in order to maintain control over campus and ensure the cessation of the ongoing encampment and any future encampments, IU administration scrambled to put forth a new expressive activity policy — UA-10. This policy was sent to student leaders across the 9 campuses.
At the time, I was a member of the IU Student Government Congress. We held a meeting discussing each section at length, and in the end we unanimously voted to reject it and noted our recommendations that were to be sent back. The executive branch, then the FUSE administration, also sent out a campus-wide survey that garnered roughly 2,000 responses — most of them negative. All feedback was sent to the administration to review and subsequently revise the policy draft.
Except there was virtually no revision.
The policy draft I read ahead of the congress meeting was nearly identical to the UA-10 policy that was passed and carried the same fundamental grievances I had with it: the complete restriction on expressive activity from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m., the disallowance of temporary structures without prior approval, the banning of overnight camping and the allowance of police to enforce the policy. The last being directly contrary to a subsection I admired greatly in the 1969 Dunn Meadow policy that forbade the use of physical force as a means of enforcement.
While overnight camping had technically been banned since 1969, it's clear the policy was rarely, if ever, enforced. IU proudly touts its history of activism with the Vietnam War and Gulf War encampments. But with the past encampment and the impending implementation of UA-10, unpunished overnight camping was undoubtedly to be a thing of the past.
On July 29, 2024, in the name of student safety, IU Board of Trustees Chair Quinn Buckner introduced UA-10. It passed 6-3 after lengthy debate and multiple failed amendments, notably with Student Trustee Kyle Seibert voting against the resolution and offering many of the failed amendments.
—
Following UA-10's implementation, testimony from a staff member at a weekly Sample Gates candlelight vigil — organized to mourn free speech at IU — who had been threatened with termination in the case of a second violation of UA-10 still haunts my mind. Many students, faculty and staff were forced to stand across the street, partaking in the protest from afar, in fear of a citation.
Aside from the candlelight vigils, protests persisted during the allowed hours of 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. But in a bizarre fashion, on April 4, 2025, IU attempted to shut down a pro-Palestinian protest perfectly compliant with UA-10.
Initially, PSC had been told by an administrator that they should register the protest through the tabling system due to speculation IU administration may attempt to quash the rally for not being approved to be at Sample Gates. This request was processed and approved, until the approval was revoked roughly 45 minutes before the start of the protest. While the request was denied, the students went ahead with the protest — as is their right to, guaranteed by the First Amendment.
However, despite demonstrating within the time restrictions, installing no temporary structures, and not materially or substantially disrupting university operations, administrators insisted that the protest was not permissible according to UA-10.
I asked administrators point-blank as to why they were asking the protestors to cease and disperse, to which they replied that since it was a planned protest, as evident by the advertisements on social media a few days in advance, that it needed to be approved by IU.
Then it was found there was no such rule.
And then it was because they were empowered to determine proper time and place restrictions for expressive activity and had done so to shut down the rally. And then that was found to be fatally misunderstood.
And then it was because IU event management policy UA-19 prohibited such a rally. And then that was found to be seriously misrepresented.
Each explanation fell apart as quickly as it was given, and students and administrators argued back and forth throughout the protest until the administrators conceded and left. What began as a peaceful protest quickly became a revealing display on how administrative power can be brandished to threaten displays of free speech when left unchallenged.
—
It is clear that the First Amendment rights of students, faculty, and staff have not been a priority of this university administration and board of trustees, and it is clear that the input of the IU community has not been duly considered when it comes to issues of academic freedom, freedom of speech and shared governance.
In light of the pausing of the time restrictions of UA-10, IU leaders have the chance to reconsider their approach to free speech on campus as a whole, and the June 12, 2025 IU Board of Trustees meeting will provide leadership the opportunity to do just that, with the agenda set to address changes to UA-10 and Whitten’s salary.
Higher education faces unprecedented threats of dwindling state and federal funding, attacks on DEI initiatives and marginalized students, and barrages against academic freedom and freedom of speech. Now is the time for IU leadership to own up to their mistakes, such as the gravely irresponsible UA-10 policy, and commit to working with all stakeholders of IU by increasing transparency, communication, and shared governance across the 9 campuses.
Standing up for your principles isn’t always easy — sometimes it’s a fight — but maliciously disregarding shared governance, submitting to the increasing corporatization of higher education and bowing to (if not encouraging) political agents aiming to undermine academic freedom and freedom of expression utterly betrays what IU ultimately stands for. It’s time to buck the trend, have the courage to stand up for IU students, faculty, and staff and work towards a public institution truly for, by and of the people.
Omeed Mehrzad (he/him) is a rising junior on the pre-med track studying Political Science/Economics.
Editor's note: This story was updated to correct a grammar error.
