Editorial | Where is the line?

Photo illustration by SAM ANDRUS Photo Editor

We’ve seen this movie before. We know how it ends. Absolutely nothing is going to happen. 

On Aug. 12, Chapman law professor John Eastman published an article in Newsweek questioning Kamala Harris’ citizenship. It was quickly labelled as racist by a wide range of students, parents and talking heads on Twitter, a platform our school was trending on in response. Many suggested Eastman be fired or action be taken in some definitive way. 

The minute we heard about Eastman’s piece, the moment we saw “Chapman” and “Birtherism” going viral on Twitter, the instant we first tapped a key into our brief on the situation – we knew absolutely nothing was going to happen. So when nobody we sent interview requests to within our campus would reply, we were prepared to get the same sort of risk management email we’ve received so many times in the past. And that’s exactly what we got on Aug. 13.

“Chapman University respects the academic freedom of all its faculty,” wrote Jamie Ceman, Chapman’s vice president of strategic marketing and communications. “The opinions expressed by faculty are their own and we will never restrict their right to express it, however, they do not represent the opinions of the institution.” 

We understand the views of one don’t represent the views of all. But nobody on this campus can deny that these racial prejudices within Chapman exist. And here’s something Chapman has never seemed to want to acknowledge: at this point, these kinds of opinions absolutely do represent the opinions of our institution – particularly when they go on to a national level where President Donald Trump acknowledges the argument, and Chapman becomes known by communities outside of Orange as an institution that just threw in the towel as a response. Where is the line between free speech and hate speech?

Eastman’s piece certainly may not have intended to portray a racist agenda. But the fact remains that nothing more than a Chapman PR statement was given. Even Newsweek provided a formal apology for the column being used to “perpetuate racism and xenophobia,” and the institution that employs Eastman to shape and influence younger minds has nothing more to say than a “he’s entitled to his opinion.” So many students and parents, so many members of the community that Chapman claims to care so much about, were outraged – and the institution does nothing except hide behind the front of free speech. We’re frankly wondering if you do actually care about our opinions. Silence speaks volumes.

The truth is, this is the kind of rhetoric we so often hear when Chapman generates headlines: a white Republican professor fact-checking the citizenship of a Black and South Asian woman born in Oakland, California, the initial refusal to remove “The Birth of a Nation” movie poster, the invitation of borderline extremist right-wing speakers to campus. 

This can’t be defended as simply “free speech.” Some of these voices actively threaten violence and generate hostile environments for BIPOC students on campus. The administration claims to listen, but no steps are taken. Eastman won’t be disciplined. The controversial busts on campus won’t be removed. These speakers will keep coming to campus.

Here’s the point where we’d normally insert a rousing call to action for the university to consider. But we’re done with that. We’ve tried it countless times before. Nothing’s worked.

At this point, we as students are drifting further away from having any sort of interest in associating with Chapman. We’re ashamed and embarrassed. We’ve resigned to our broken undergraduate memories. We’ll just roll over, keep our heads down and go through the motions to finish off our degrees. And once we enter the workforce, we’ll try to prove we’re more than the institution we graduated from.