Policies on Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression

On February 5, 2024, the ABA House of Delegates Adopted the new Standard 208, which requires law schools “to adopt, publish, and adhere to written policies that protect academic freedom… [and] that encourage and support the free expression of ideas.”
 
The University of Baltimore School of Law is committed to both academic freedom and freedom of expression.
 
In addition to the policies below, please see the University System of Maryland’s Freedom of Speech and Expression Value Statement and Guidelines.

 

Policy on Academic Freedom [1]

 

Members of the faculty of the University of Baltimore School of Law shall enjoy the right to academic freedom set forth below.  This Policy shall apply to all faculty members in the University of Baltimore School of Law, including full-time, part-time, tenured, tenure-track, non-tenure track, librarian, clinical, adjunct, and visiting faculty members.  This Policy applies to research activities, scholarship, engaging in law school governance, participating in law related public service activities, curating library collections, and exercising teaching responsibilities.

 

1. Each member of the faculty is entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of his/her other academic duties.  In other words, academic freedom protections are not a bar to evaluations of faculty members and consequences for lack of competency in or unsatisfactory performance of a faculty member’s duties. Freedom in research and publication does not prohibit a review of faculty research or possible determination that the research does not meet generally applicable standards for scholarship. Further, freedom in research and publication does not prohibit a decision that such scholarship may or may not be eligible for a research stipend under the generally applicable standards.  At the same time, mere disagreement with a faculty member’s methodology or conclusions whether with respect to teaching or research shall not be a basis for any discipline, denial of benefits, or the like.
2. Subject to generally applicable teaching and assessment requirements agreed upon and required by the full faculty, each member of the faculty is entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching matters which have no relation to their subject and which detracts from quality instruction.
3. When a member of the faculty speaks or writes in their individual capacity, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but they should make every effort to indicate that they do not speak on behalf of the School of Law and that their views may differ from that of the institution.
4. It must be remembered that the faculty of the School of Law is responsible for transmitting accumulated knowledge to students in an accessible and respectful manner. Academic freedom, therefore, should not be understood as a license to mistreat or engage in rude or otherwise inappropriate behavior towards students, staff, other faculty, or visitors. Academic freedom does not protect unlawful speech or behavior, nor does it protect speech or behavior that is in violation of University or University System of Maryland policies. Further, academic freedom does not provide a right to refuse to teach assigned courses, or to consistently fail in successfully imparting information to students or carrying out other faculty responsibilities.
5. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as being inconsistent with or superseding generally applicable requirements for promotion and tenure.
6. Members of the faculty of the University of Baltimore School of Law shall enjoy the right to due process whenever the Administration (represented by the Dean, the Provost, the President, or any of their designees) seek to impose any sanctions or penalties for any action or activity covered by this policy.  To that end, the below process shall be followed when a faculty member requests a hearing to address an alleged violation of this Policy. [2]
7. There shall be a standing Committee on Academic Freedom consisting of eight members, each serving for two years, with staggered terms, such that every year, four new members are appointed. The membership on the Committee shall be limited to tenured members of the faculty. The Committee membership shall be selected on alphabetical basis, so that each year, four members next on the alphabetical list of tenured faculty members would join the Committee.
8. Whenever the Administration seeks to impose any sanctions on a faculty member as a result of such faculty member’s conduct covered by this policy, the faculty member shall have a right to request a hearing before the Committee on Academic Freedom prior to imposition of any sanctions.
9. Should a hearing be requested, a hearing panel of three members of the Committee on Academic Freedom, chosen by lot, shall be constituted. The Administration shall, within reasonable time, present charges to the hearing panel in writing, and the faculty member shall have an opportunity to respond to any allegations in writing, as well as have the right of oral presentation to the hearing panel.
10. The hearing panel shall have the authority to take evidence, hear from witnesses, and otherwise engage in such fact-finding as it sees fit.
11. At the conclusion of the hearing, which shall conclude within reasonable time, but no later than 1 semester after the charges have been filed, the hearing panel shall make its recommendation to the Administration.  The Administration may accept or reject the hearing panel recommendation.
12. In recommending a sanction, the hearing panel shall take cognizance of the different impact that a particular sanction may have on different faculty ranks subject to this policy.  Thus, the hearing panel shall recognize the differences between tenured and non-tenured faculty, as well as librarians, adjuncts, full-time non-tenure track faculty and others.
13. The covered faculty member shall have appellate rights utilizing the same appellate process as is prescribed for appeals of tenure or promotion decisions. See University of Baltimore Appointment, Promotion in Rank and Tenure Policy and Procedures (section III).
14. For the purposes of this policy, “sanctions or penalties” shall mean any action that denies or restricts eligibility for any benefit, honor, or allowance for which the faculty member would otherwise be eligible for, or any other adverse employment action. The term “sanctions or penalties” does not include matters like class scheduling, assignment of the faculty member to teach particular courses (except when the faculty member is affirmatively restricted from teaching certain courses), and denial of requests for leave or visit when such denial is based on school’s staffing needs or other generally applicable and uniformly applies standards.

Policy on Freedom of Expression[3]

 

The University of Baltimore School of Law is a public institution and thus is fully bound by the requirements of the First Amendment. Furthermore, as a matter of principle, and in light of its special role in transmitting knowledge and engaging in the search for truth, the School is committed to principles of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. To that end, we include and embrace a multitude of people and ideas in everything we do. We protect the freedom of all members of our community to seek truth and express their views. Freedom of expression in an intellectually and culturally diverse environment provides all members of our community the opportunity to learn, grow, and contribute to our shared mission to create a more just, free, and prosperous world. The School of Law is committed to protecting free speech and free expression on its campus and in its education programs.
 
Being exposed to competing perspectives is essential for questioning our assumptions, testing our beliefs, and refining our knowledge. The School of Law must maintain an environment where all members of the community can engage in difficult and challenging conversations with civility and mutual respect, where confronting opposing ideas and perspectives becomes an opportunity to learn from and with each other.

Freedom of expression is not incompatible with a positive and collaborative environment where everyone can thrive. Efforts to maintain a civil and respectful environment cannot be used as reasons to limit the rights of others to express views that we may consider misguided or even offensive. As articulated by a 2014 report from the University of Chicago, “debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.”
 
At the same time, because the School of Law’s facilities are intended primarily for the use of its students, faculty, and employees in their efforts to advance the educational mission of the School, no use of such facilities shall be permitted if such use is unlawful, threatens the safety of the School of Law’s community, or substantially interferes with the carrying out of the School of Law’s functions or approved activities. In maintaining a safe campus, in which its students, faculty, and employees can advance the educational mission of the School of Law without disruption, the School may establish constitutionally permissible time, place, and manner restrictions on the use of its facilities and property (e.g., registration requirements, times when use is permitted, limitations on amplified sound).  In other words, the School of Law remains free to impose traditional, generally applicable, and content-neutral “time, place, and manner” restrictions on speech.
 
The School of Law is committed to protecting the rights of its members to speak as well as the rights of others to disagree with and protest the speech of others. However, neither the right to protest nor freedom of expression permit disrupting or preventing another person’s ability to speak or hindering the ability of others to see or hear that speech. The First Amendment protects the right to peacefully protest, demonstrate, and speak in opposition to others’ speech, as long as it does not impede the constitutionally protected speech of others. Accordingly, this policy does not protect protests that disrupt classroom instruction, speeches by invited guests, meetings of various student or faculty groups, public events, and the like.
 
Fundamentally, all School of Law community members enjoy the right to freedom of speech and expression. The School of Law is committed to following the University the University System of Maryland Freedom of Speech and Expression Value Statement and Guidelines. Individuals are encouraged to speak, write, listen, challenge, and demonstrate as a natural platform for intellectual engagement. This is the true spirit of Freedom and Learning.

 

---

[1] Approved by Faculty May 2025, awaiting Provost & System Approval.
[2] Where the sanction imposed involves termination of a tenured or tenure-track faculty member, this procedure will not apply and the matter will be addressed pursuant to the University System of Maryland Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty, II.1.00, I.C.7 & 8.
[3] Approved by Faculty May 2025, awaiting Provost & System Approval