More than a year after senior Maciej Murakowski filed a lawsuit against the university, a federal judge ruled the university violated Murakowski's First Amendment rights when it suspended him for writings on his Web site while on the university's server.
On Sept. 4, the court decided educational institutions may restrict speech in some cases in order to protect the educational environment and the well-being of its students. However, the court found the university had not presented sufficient evidence to show Murakowski's posting caused such a disruption and posed such a threat that the First Amendment would allow restriction.
In May 2007, Murakowski was suspended from class and banned from campus because of postings on his Web site while living in Sypherd Hall.
The university charged him with violating the Responsible Computing and Use of University Computing Resources policy and the Disruptive Conduct policy.
According to court records, in June 2005, Murakowski established a personal Web site that consisted of controversial postings, including satirical essays such as "how to skin a cat" and an article titled, "The Sociopath," which refers to a man giving a woman a hot bath and massage and then setting her on fire.
"It was basically a blog," Murakowski said. "The fact that it was on the Internet allowed others to view it but I didn't actually promote it. It didn't really matter to me if others saw it. It was my own thing but if other people saw it, then I wouldn't complain."
Murakowski sued the university in August 2007 for violating his First Amendment rights. He sought reinstatement, credit for the classes he would miss and punitive damages.
"At first there was the basic anger and the feeling that this was just a horrible, horrific injustice," he said. "Then I tried to work within the university's system to get this resolved and when that didn't work, I went out of their system to the courts."
Murakowski said the university became aware of his Web postings after a brother of a female student complained.
David Finger, Murakowski's lawyer, said last year the university never ordered Murakowski to remove the Web site from its server after the first two complaints.
The site had received three complaints since November 2005.
"The university pretty much ignored it for a couple of weeks," Murakowski said. "Then after the [Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University] shootings, they continued to ignore it for about three days. Then I was suspended."
Murakowski said he felt he was treated unjustly by the university.
"I think that no one would have cared if Virginia Tech had not happened," he said.
Murakowski said he would not have sued the university if he did not feel his rights were infringed.
"I felt violated, trampled, all those fun little words," he said. "If I didn't feel this way, I wouldn't have sued."
At Murakowski's May 2, 2007 Judicial Affairs hearing, officials determined he was to be suspended from classes and banned from campus until the end of the year. After that, he had to be readmitted to the university following a meeting with a psychiatrist.
"Once the psychiatrist said I was OK and not a threat, I was allowed to go to my classes, just not the dorms," he said.
Murakowski was charged with failure to comply after the university discovered he used his access card to enter residence halls on two occasions. Murakowski said he was then suspended for one semester.
The court ruled this month that while the university was wrong to suspend Murakowski for his Web site, it was justified in suspending him for entering his residence hall without permission.
Murakowski was awarded nominal damages of approximately $10.
His suspension has since expired and he currently lives off campus and is studying chemical engineering at the university.
"In terms of freedom of speech, I guess the ruling was in my favor," Murakowski said. "I think the judge got one thing wrong in that she decided that because UD said they implemented their policies fairly, that they did. Really, I think the only reasonable thing would be to have had the case sent back to the university to be reheard."
Dean of Students George Brelsford said the university has a behavioral concerns committee that meets biweekly.
"The university's primary concern is always with the security and safety of students," Brelsford said.
Junior Jillian Saunders said she feels the university took the right steps in addressing this issue.
"After something like Virginia Tech, colleges across the country need to be aware of potential threats," Saunders said. "I don't necessarily agree with the way the university went about this process, but it is important that the administration is being proactive when it comes to a possible risk."
Junior Frank Corkery said the Virginia Tech shootings made the country more conscious of students' behavior.
"I really think that with the shootings at Virginia Tech, colleges across the nation are becoming more alert," Corkery said. "You need to act attentively when a student complains about feeling threatened by another student."
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our feed
Contact us through email
Be the first to comment on this article!