Just Ask
University officials are coming under fire for inviting controversial commencement speakers. They should have included student input.
By Jamelle Bouie
May 14, 2009
University of Notre Dame students plan to protest the school’s awarding of an honorary degree to President Barack Obama. (AP Photo/Joe Raymond)In early March the University of Virginia’s student newspaper, The Cavalier Daily, reported that Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, would deliver the UVA’s commencement address in May. By the paper’s account, Wilkinson was an ideal candidate for the university’s commencement speech: He graduated from UVA’s Law School in 1972 and served as a law professor and a deputy assistant U.S. attorney general before his appointment to the Court of Appeals in 1994.
Unfortunately, The Cavalier Daily failed to note that Wilkinson is something of a controversial figure within the judicial community. In 2003, while serving on the Fourth Circuit court, Wilkinson wrote the majority opinion upholding the right of the United States government to detain Yaser Emam Hamdi, an American citizen arrested on charges of being an “illegal enemy combatant”—a term the Bush administration invented to hold him indefinitely without access to counsel or court. Speaking on behalf of the court, Wilkinson argued that the Constitution grants broad war making powers to the executive branch, and that those in turn empower the president to strip enemy combatants of their habeas corpus rights. Fortunately, Wilkinson’s endorsement of near-unlimited executive power was overturned when in 2004, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the scope of the executive branch’s powers are far narrower than what Wilkinson maintained.
This certainly isn’t the first time a commencement choice has generated controversy. Earlier this year, the University of Vermont faced a torrent of criticism after it announced that conservative celebrity Ben Stein would be delivering its commencement address. Critics argued that Stein, whose most recent project involved him railing against evolutionary theory, held views on science which were “an affront to the basic tenets of the academy.” More recently protestors at the University of Notre Dame, a Catholic institution, where students and faculty are blasting the administration for its decision to have President Barack Obama deliver its commencement address. Unsurprisingly, most of the opposition is focused on Obama’s pro-choice views and his support for (and authorization of) federally funded embryonic stem-cell research.
All of these controversies suggest that an element of choosing a commencement speaker is representation of student voices. In each of these instances, the administration didn’t look for—and didn’t seem interested in—student input. The administration should take the values of the institution into account when choosing a commencement speaker. After all, the whole reason for having a commencement speaker is to “send off” the graduating class with a message that resonates. A speaker who understands the values of the institution is almost essential.
At UVA, nearly immediately after the announcement of Wilkinson as speaker, the details of his career jumped onto the student body’s radar, with several prominent students using The Cavalier Daily’s editorial page to lob criticisms at the university’s president, John T. Casteen III, for his controversial selection. Guest columnists Bernice Ramirez and Carlos Oronce attacked the process behind Wilkinson’s selection, rightly noting that the speaker selection committee was virtually shielded from outside input or criticism.
One student who described himself as “pretty in tune with how this University operates” had no idea that there was a committee that chose the commencement speaker. On the main editorial page, staff columnists argued that as a public figure, Wilkinson’s values were antithetical to the University’s. Columnist Prashanth Parameswaran declared Wilkinson’s views “incompatible with those embodied by the University and too baseless to go unchallenged by the students within it.”
Another writer, Amelia Meyer, criticized Wilkinson for his views on diversity (Wikinson has argued that affirmative action results in “ethnic separation”) and same-sex marriage (he called the “American constitutional tradition” the chief casualty in the debate). Meyer said the selection of Wilkinson “highly symbolic of the distance that exists between a dynamic student body and an out-of-touch administration.” Editorials opposing Wilkinson’s selection also appeared in national publications.
Other students took their opposition directly to the administration. Quynh Vu, a well-connected senior at the University, circulated a petition criticizing Casteen and the University’s Board of Visitors for its “complete lack of regard for student interests” and its equally problematic “lack of regard for the values we at the University hold most dear.” Indeed, she finds the University’s choice problematic for reasons that go beyond Wilkinson’s political views. “UVA,” she explains, “has a tradition of being a very exclusive, good ol’ boy school. We already have problems attracting bright minority students; to bring a commencement speaker that many find to be opposed to affirmative action, queers, or civil liberties for certain groups just reinforces this view.”
The university’s administration is unwilling to acknowledge any error on its part. In a phone interview with Meyer, Secretary of the Board of Visitors Alexander Gilliam called student opposition to the choice “pure crap.”
On the other hand, any given administration is operating with substantial restraints when trying to attract compelling commencement speakers. UVA, for instance, doesn’t provide honorary degrees, pay large speaker fees, or invite heads of state. This significantly limits the field of possible commencement speakers for schools that don’t offer such incentives. Even at UVA, the consensus is that Wilkinson was chosen less for his political or judicial views and more for his availability and long-term enthusiasm for university.
Instead of applying a stringent ideological litmus test to commencement speakers (which ignores the limits most institutions operate under), a better option might be to ensure that students can voice their thoughts on the possible speakers, with a guarantee that those voices will be heard. Among the UVA students I spoke with, almost all of them were most bothered by the administration’s clear disregard for student opinion. Such a reaction is understandable; the commencement is one of the last major activities in a college career, and many students feel that they deserve a voice in the selection. A more open selection process might not prevent Wilkinson or Stein (probably not Obama), but it at the very least, it could give students greater ownership over an event that really does belong to them.
Jamelle Bouie is graduating from UVA this weekend and a staff writer at Campus Progress.
Social Bookmarking
--------
Comments
!
UCLA is having James Franco speak at our commencement this year (I am a graduating senior). He graduated from our school last year and is most notable for his role as a stoner in Pineapple Express. Blehh. Don’t know if that’s worse. lol
— Anna - May 15, 01:50 PM - #For those who lack a broader understanding of the University’s constituency, history and purpose in choosing an appropriate speaker, the selection of a commencement speaker is not amenable to some imagined democratic process. Further, the one so chosen is not necessarily for the benefit of those taking his or her degree. Ultimately, it is the prerogative of the University administration and the audience for such an address is not limited to those for whom the event is ostensibly held, those taking their degrees, but includes a vast public of parents, alumni and friends of the University. Accordingly, Jay Wilkinson is an excellent choice, who is not only a eminent jurist of sound legal thinking, but is also a published author and past editor of The Virginian-Pilot. While many, even at the University, cannot fathom an intelligent apologist of conservative thought, this in no manner makes him anathema to the arena of public discourse. Disagree with the man, by all means, but do so in a rational and civil manner. Jay Wilkinson is an esteemed son of the University who has served it well through the years.
— Jessie Gibson - May 15, 09:05 PM - #