The Irvine 11 and Civil Rights for All

This fall the University of California at Irvine, a campus of over 20,000 students began the semester without a Muslim student association. As the United States struggles with a persistent undercurrent of Islamphobia, I believe this is significant. As with previous discussions of diversity, we must work through how Islamic identity fits in the great puzzle of American pluralism in the wake of the current political climate.

Supporters of the Irvine 11 claim that they were found “guilty of speaking truth to power,” as a guilty verdict came down this September 23 from the California State Court. In addition to their campus suspensions, the students were held accountable for misdemeanor counts of disturbing a meeting and sentenced to three years of informal probation and community service. The outcome is in contrast to the proceedings after a similar event occurred on campus last year at Georgetown, when students interrupted a speech by General David Petraeus by shouting the names of soldiers who died in Afghanistan. After a campus counter-protest, condemning the tactics of the protesters, Hoyas for Respectful Dialogue issued a formal apology to Petraeus. However, no disciplinary action was taken against the students.

I can speak with no authority except my own opinion, but it seems the only difference between these two events is the content of the protest and the discretion of the university. The limits of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are pushed constantly on university campuses. While I believe their methods to be outside the spirit of dialogue presumably fostered in academia, the choice to prosecute the Irvine students is rather extreme.

There are, of course, greater societal implications to be drawn from the comparison. Are we more likely to view Muslim students, or pro-Palestinian students, as dangerous? Do those that belong to this particular socio-political faction have the same civil rights as other American citizens? I believe it may be equally misguided to read too much into the motives of the university. The cross campus comparison is an imperfect experiment; there is no true control in my scenario. However, despite my full-hearted (maybe fool-hearted) attempts to give UCI the benefit of the doubt, the Irvine 11 can make a strong claim of prejudice.

This is especially true in terms of the suspension of the Muslim Student Union. As a society we struggle with the application of collective guilt. Is it right that the MSU be punished collectively for the actions of a handful of their members, even if, as the university contends, the meeting space was used to organize the protests? The root of Islamphobia is the inability to separate individual actors from the body as a whole. As America fights to reconcile pluralistic ideals with a growing suspicion of Muslim Americans, the disbandment of a Muslim student forum with no other record of “radicalism” is a grave mistake.

The protection of civil rights for all American citizens without discrimination is a fundamental pillar of our democracy. I pray that University of California has pure motives in enforcing a rather murky campus policy. Some rights are worth much more than an undisturbed meeting.