The University of Rhode Island College Republicans are fighting sanctions by the university's student senate for an advertisement for a "white heterosexual American male scholarship" they published in the student newspaper. College Republican leaders say the ad was meant to be satirical.
The URI Student Senate, which funds the group, has already rejected an appeal by College Republicans, saying the scholarship violates bylaws that prohibit discrimination by any member group.
The November advertisement offered a $100 scholarship to the applicant who could best explain in 100 words or less what being a white heterosexual American male meant to him and what adversities he has had to face given his combination of race, sexual orientation and nationality. Forty or so students applied for the scholarship.
The URI Student Organization Advisory and Review Committee handed down a two-fold punishment to the College Republicans after ruling Feb. 19 that the scholarship is discriminatory. They ordered the College Republicans to issue a second ad clarifying the scholarship's satirical nature in the Good 5-Cent Cigar, URI's student newspaper. In addition, the group will be put on probation, forcing it to seek special approval for its event plans for the next year.
Because nowhere in its newspaper advertisement did the College Republicans indicate the scholarship's satirical nature, student senators also discussed whether the scholarship violates state false advertising or fraud laws. Instead of punishing the group for this ambiguity, the student senate decided to allow the College Republicans to clarify the satire in a letter to the editor.
After appealing the ruling, URI College Republicans Chairman Ryan Bilodeau was granted an opportunity to defend the scholarship in front of the student senate. On March 14, student senators rejected the appeal by a two-thirds majority.
Matt Yates, the senate's student organization advisory and review committee chairman, expressed frustration with the issue. "All we're asking him to do is clarify why (he's) giving the scholarship," Yates told The Herald. "I'm a registered Republican, half of my committee is a registered Republican," he added, refuting claims by Bilodeau that he is up against a leftist judiciary.
The clarification requested by the student senate asks that the College Republicans clarify that the scholarship was satire and apologize to the 40 or so applicants. It does not ask the College Republicans to apologize for any discrimination.
Bilodeau said he was confused about the punishment. "(The student senate) has been very unclear and ambiguous and have changed their story several times," he said. "I don't know what (the apology) is for, because they tell me different things at different times."
Despite the failure of their appeal, the College Republicans continue to refuse to issue a clarification in the Cigar. "What they're asking for is still ultimately forced speech, and that's illegal," Bilodeau said.
Citing their First Amendment rights, the College Republicans have sought the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a group that defends freedom of speech on campuses across the country. FIRE is the same organization that defended Brown's Reformed University Fellowship after it was suspended last semester.
In a March 13 letter to the student senate, FIRE argued the proposed apology "forces the College Republicans to engage in public expression with which they disagree." In the letter, FIRE threatens to use "all of (their) resources to (see) this matter to a just and moral conclusion." The letter sets a March 28 deadline.
Yates said FIRE misunderstands the facts of the case, adding that College Republicans are not being asked to apologize but rather to publicly clarify the scholarship's satirical nature.
A press release issued by the College Republicans said the purpose of the proposed scholarship was "to bring attention to the inherently racist policy of affirmative action." The group currently claims it never intended to distribute the $100 and that the scholarship was solely a publicity stunt to raise awareness of their position on the issue.
