Stanford CRs clap back at school after $19,000 D'Souza security fee
Stanford University's College Republicans is accusing the school of silencing conservatives after having issues inviting conservative author Dinesh D'Souza.
The group requested $6,000 to host D'Souza, received $16.50, but got slapped with a $19,000 security fee.
The College Republicans have a private donor willing to pay the fee, but Stanford is requiring 50 percent of the funds to come from on-campus sources.
The Stanford University chapter of College Republicans is accusing the university of actively silencing conservative viewpoints on campus after the university blocked the group’s hosting of conservative speaker Dinesh D’Souza.
Stanford’s College Republicans originally requested $6,000 to host a Feb. 28 speech by author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, reported The Stanford Daily. The Associated Students of Stanford University, the student government, awarded the club a whopping $16.50 to fund the event, according to Young America’s Foundation’s The New Guard.
Stanford’s Student Activities and Leadership Office told the College Republicans that they would be required to pay over $19,000 in security fees for the event.
The College Republicans secured a donation by a private donor who is willing to pay the security fees, but the group was hit with yet another obstacle from university administration. They are now being told that “on-campus sources” must constitute at least half of the funding for their event.
Stanford’s College Republicans chapter says it was unable to find evidence that such a policy even existed until after the group questioned it and after the club had applied for on-campus funding and been awarded less than $20.
“First, Stanford refused to provide this policy in writing to Young America’s Foundation before Young America’s Foundation released their press release,” Stanford College Republicans Executive Director Quinn Barry told Campus Reform. “They have similarly refused to release this policy multiple times as requested by SCR. Now, just hours before the Stanford Daily article was published last night, all of a sudden this ‘policy’ is online.”
“Requiring 50% funding from on-campus sources solely for events with security costs, meaning events where there are massive protests, is, SCR believes, designed to silence conservatives on campus,” Barry continued, adding that the rule requires the group to secure funding from a “radical student government” that he claims “despises” the group.
“Meanwhile, it allows the vast majority of other groups to avoid this process,” the executive director told Campus Reform. “We are calling for this policy to be repealed immediately. The heckler’s veto is not sound authority for eliminating the free exchange of ideas at Stanford.”
While Stanford’s posted “Off-Campus Fundraising Policy” lists many specific stipulations, including a note that funding from private donors is only accepted in “rare cases,” it includes no evidence of the 50/50 policy. While the College Republicans chapter says it currently wishes to resolve the matter internally, Barry told Campus Reform that the group is “not taking any options off the table,” as far as lawsuits are concerned.
D’Souza called Stanford’s actions “shameful” to The New Guard, saying that the school “seems terrified of genuine intellectual diversity.”
“I intend to bring to Stanford the perspective of an immigrant of color who refuses to be cowed by the Left and who doesn’t accept the dependency of the progressive ethnic plantation as offering genuine dignity or success,” D’Souza added.
Stanford’s College Republicans chapter also expressed concern with the student government’s new “Director of Academic Freedom” position.
The individual “refine[s] free speech policy” on campus, according to Zintis Inde, the Stanford graduate student who currently holds the position.
Noting Stanford student government President Shanta Katipamula’s characterization of the role as an “advocacy” position, Barry claimed that the role also comes with an unspoken task of advocating against conservative speakers. He referenced Inde’s statement that the student government is prepared to “promote a principled community response” to speech that, while legal, marginalizes members of the Stanford community.
“SCR believes it is not a coincidence that these words eerily mirror the [student government]’s actions of obstruction,” Barry said, adding that Inde “may be colluding with the student government to shut down free speech.”
Stanford University did not respond to requests for comment.
Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @celinedryan