Opinion: Private schools, like Regis Jesuit, must resist the temptation to censor student voices – The Denver Post

Just a few years ago, as freshmen in Regis Jesuit High Schools student media program, we memorized the First Amendment, discussed the dangers of censorship, and listened intently to Mary Beth Tinker preach the power of a free press.

Unfortunately, students at our former high school have been robbed of those freedoms. On Dec. 17, the winter issue of Elevate, Regis Jesuits student magazine, was released. The issue included an opinion piece on abortion in which a freshman advocated for the basic human right of choice. Nothing she wrote contradicted the magazines editorial policies, which read that school officials shall not practice prior review or to censor any student media. The policy only notes narrow exceptions, like legally obscene content and the termination of employees. Nonetheless, the school retracted not only the article but the entire magazine.

We recognize the schools prerogative to educate students on the beliefs of the Catholic Church. Indeed, the school has made its anti-abortion stance clear in theology classes, its pro-life club, and official messaging. But the issue is not whether those with uteruses have a right to abortion. The issue is whether students should be able to question, speak, and reach their own conclusions. In essence, the question is whether students should be educated.

It is true private schools are allowed much greater latitude surrounding the First Amendment. However, there is legal theory and precedent for private school students deriving legal protection from school policies. The Student Press Law Center writes, Where a private school voluntarily establishes a set of guidelines or rules, it must adhere to them. Otherwise, there exists a breach of a legally enforceable promise .

Regis Jesuit voluntarily adopted its editorial policies, which were publically available until this week. The question of legality is not as straightforward as some may argue. Regardless, the legality of censorship does not render it appropriate.

Regis Jesuits website proclaims, We do not teach our students what to think; we teach them how to think It also states, We are called to create environments in which our students may encounter and engage multiple points of view that are presented thoughtfully and respectfully. In light of recent events, this is false advertising.

What is so disheartening about this censorship is that it does not reflect our education at Regis Jesuit. Previously, the school allowed an OpEd praising Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Roe v. Wade. Why start censoring students now?

We believe one reason to be a fear of conflict with the Denver Archdiocese, which is supported by the statement released by Archbishop Aquila. Although the Code of Canon Law allows Jesuit institutions self-governance, it also permits the bishop to issue directives regarding staffing decisions and other matters. Regis Jesuit depends on Archbishop Aquila for its recognition as a Catholic school, which has been leveraged against Jesuit schools before.

Aquila dictated that Catholic schools must be unabashedly defending the anti-abortion movement no matter what the cost. In this case, the cost was two beloved teachers, Nicole Arduini and Maria Lynch, who were fired for allowing the article to be published.

We dispute the notion that censorship is equivalent to defending a position. The school should have released the article in conjunction with their own statement, or alongside a pro-life stance, as was common practice. The decision to fire faculty also sparked a culture of fear among teachers and contributed to dire staffing shortages. A third teacher quit when burdened with an unfair workload. First and foremost, Regis Jesuit must honor its responsibility to educate students, which is impossible when educators are constantly looking over their shoulders or even leaving.

Censorship is not a new issue in schools, private or public. While the rights of schools to control student speech vary, the importance of student voice remains the same. Georgetown Universitys Free Speech Tracker has recorded 34 instances of student press censorship since 2017, and countless more go unreported. Regis Jesuit, and all Jesuit institutions, should follow Georgetowns lead in affirming the free speech of students. Georgetown explains its policy as being necessitated by the Catholic and Jesuit traditions citing the Catholic teaching about autonomy of reason and reverence for conscience.

Beyond religion, all American schools should be committed to promoting democracy. The press is a corollary of democracy, and opposing it discourages students from participating in the democracy that guarantees the freedom of religion. The future of democracy is directly threatened by polarization and unwillingness to have civil discussions.

Finally, all schools should be committed to effective education. The free sharing of ideas is the cornerstone of education. When students are sequestered to echo chambers, they cannot encounter diverse viewpoints and thus receive a less rigorous education than their peers.

Accordingly, all schools, including Regis Jesuit, should adopt policies to ensure their publications are classified as public forums for student expression. To censor student journalists is not just immoral, it is ineffective education.

Madeline Proctor is beginning her second semester at Harvard University, where she writes for the student weekly Harvard Independent. She was editor-in-chief of Regis Jesuits Elevate magazine, as well as former editor of the Opinion and Editorial section. Sophia Marcinek is a second-year nursing student at Seattle University and is a staff writer for the student newspaper, The Spectator. Marcinek was editor-in-chief of Elevate magazine and the head of Student Media in 2020.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Read this article:
Opinion: Private schools, like Regis Jesuit, must resist the temptation to censor student voices - The Denver Post