Protests erupted last spring and will likely erupt again this fall on college campuses throughout the nation about the ongoing war in the Middle East.
My perspective on these protests was shaped on a warm spring day 54 years ago when I was a freshman at Oberlin College. In fact, it was the day I decided to go to law school.
A few days earlier, President Richard Nixon had expanded the Vietnam War by invading Cambodia. Antiwar college protests erupted throughout the country.
About 1 p.m. on the afternoon of May 4, 1970, the news hit us in the gut as we huddled around TVs and radios. In just 13 seconds, the Ohio National Guard fired over 60 shots at student protesters at nearby Kent State University. Nine students were wounded, one of them paralyzed for life; and four students — Allison Krause, Jeff Miller, Sandra Scheuer and Bill Schroeder — were killed.
Bill Schroeder was a Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) student. He was not protesting. He was watching the protest and was shot in the back. Sandy Scheuer was not protesting. She was an honor student walking to class. Allison Krause and Jeff Miller were peacefully protesting. I didn’t know them, but I’ve never forgotten their names.
Most of the Kent State students were protesting peacefully, and the unjustified, deadly response by the Ohio National Guard is a stain on our national legacy of free speech, peaceful protest and civil disobedience.
During my college years, I engaged in peaceful protests against the Vietnam War, and I’m proud of my involvement. But, at the same time, I opposed attacks on ROTC facilities and other buildings. And when there was violence in the name of peace, I was sickened and angry. I remember thinking … they’re hurting our cause.
We must acknowledge that throughout history there have been those who have hijacked peaceful protests and co-opted and subverted just causes by engaging in harassment, lawlessness and/or hate speech.
Fast forward 54 years. This time the campus protests are not about a war in Southeast Asia — it’s about the war in the Middle East against the terrorist group Hamas and the resulting tragic loss of thousands of innocent Israeli and Palestinian lives.
Some have protested peacefully, and we must support and defend their right to do so. We must affirm our commitment to protecting free speech — even speech that we may disagree with.
But liberty to think and say what you believe involves taking responsibility as well. Free speech is not a license to disrupt someone else’s free speech, threaten, harass, intimidate or injure others, or damage and deface campuses and buildings.
Even worse, much of what we’re seeing on some college campuses today is hate speech — and, in some cases, hate crimes. I’ve seen firsthand how hate can tear us apart. As an Ohio state Senator, I authored Ohio’s hate crime law, and years later, in an ironic twist of fate, I successfully defended the law’s constitutionality as Ohio Attorney General in the Ohio Supreme Court.
Antisemitism and Islamophobia — along with all forms of hate — have no place in our law schools, universities or anywhere else. Although all views can be expressed, expressions of hate and bigotry must be strongly and unequivocally condemned, and hate crimes must be prosecuted. We must protect the safety of all our students.
The remedy for ideas that we think are wrong is not to seek to silence them but to counter them with better ideas, evidence and arguments. We should embrace and advocate for diversity not only in race, culture, religion and sexual orientation, but also diversity of thought. When our students face disagreements, they should respond with respect for the humanity of those they disagree with. But today we’re seeing few attempts at finding common ground.
A critical part of the early anti-war movement was campus “teach-ins.” I participated in many of these sessions as an Oberlin College student. They were genuine, facilitated efforts to understand the complex historical context of the Vietnam War and to engage in vigorous but civil discussion and debate. We need to bring back campus teach-ins. They can open minds if there are clear, enforceable ground rules for respectful dialogue.
We must protect free speech, peaceful protest and civil disobedience. We must respect diversity of thought and perspective, engage in civil discourse and find common ground. We must condemn and fight hate, harassment, intimidation and violence with moral clarity and uphold the rule of law. Our leadership challenge — and the imperative — is defending and practicing all these values in the same breath, at the same time.
Those are not liberal or conservative values. They are the values of the nation upon which we were founded as we endeavor to be a more perfect union. Fidelity to the rule of law does not mean that the law is always just. It is not. We all have work to do in making it better. But when our nation has achieved anything of consequence, it has done so most often through civil debate, mutual respect and measured compromise.
I tell our law students that in all our lives there are moments of truth — and now is our moment of truth. Now, more than ever, we need lawyer-leaders to defend and promote these values.
I think that’s what Allison Krause, Jeff Miller, Sandra Scheuer and Bill Schroeder died for on May 4, 1970. Fifty-four years later, and for the rest of our lives, we must honor their legacy.
