University Leaders Should Plan for Another Year of Campus-Speech Protests. Here’s How.

Elijah Nouvelage, Getty Images

This past spring, when the Wake Forest College Republicans wanted to bring a conservative speaker to campus, they floated a name that sends shivers down the spines of university administrators: Milo Yiannopoulos.

But Adam Goldstein, the dean of students, already had a close relationship with the group’s president. The two spoke about what the College Republicans really wanted to accomplish: to bring more conservative points of view to the campus.

“I outlined one underlying point,” Mr. Goldstein said. “I wasn’t willing to support any speaker that was going to tell any member of our community that they’re not welcome here.”

Since Mr. Yiannopoulos has on at least one occasion called out an individual student at a campus lecture, that posed a conflict. The students ultimately reconsidered inviting the campus pot-stirrer. Instead, they settled on Roger Stone, the political consultant and lobbyist with close ties to Donald Trump. Mr. Stone is not uncontroversial — his campaign tactics have been called unethical and he is being investigated as part of the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election — but he has not been such a campus lightning rod.

Mr. Goldstein said he will work with the College Republicans to facilitate Mr. Stone’s visit, organizing a panel discussion on ethics in campaigning around the time of the event.Given the violence that has swirled around several of Mr. Yiannopoulos’s campus visits, Wake Forest officials might have dodged a bullet. As colleges prepare to host another crop of politically polarizing speakers this fall, many of whom will draw fervent protesters and media attention, administrators should draw a lesson, said Penny Rue, vice president of campus life at Wake Forest: Stay in close contact with your students.

Campus officials including Ms. Rue, who serves on the board of Naspa, the association for student-affairs administrators, shared recommendations for other leaders hoping to mitigate the damaging effects such events can have on universities’ senses of community and safety. The officials said they are re-examining the venues where events can take place, reviewing protocols for managing protests, and considering how to engage with students who say they are hurt by the speakers’ presence without infringing on anyone’s freedom of expression. Here are four suggestions they shared.

Rarely, If Ever, Say ‘No’

What’s clear is that the officials are committed to ensuring that their universities are not perceived as inhibiting anyone’s right to speak. Their consistent response when asked about students who object to giving a platform to speakers seen as racist, sexist, or threatening in other ways: More speech counters bad speech.

“The general principle is you never say no,” said Kevin Kruger, president of Naspa. “You try to make it happen. The only times when you try to make a different decision are when the health, safety, and wellness of the community is at risk.”

Public universities take that stance because it’s the law. As public spaces, they run into First Amendment issues when speech restrictions are seen as infringing on people’s ability to express their views, said Lee Tyner, general counsel at the University of Mississippi. Private colleges tend to have strong policies that protect freedom of speech, so they are, in effect, operating under the same principles.

There are circumstances in which speech becomes unprotected, Mr. Tyner said. If a would-be speaker rises to the level of a true threat or creates a hostile environment that is directed at a particular person, the university has a duty to remedy the situation. During an appearance at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, for example, Mr. Yiannopoulos named a transgender student who had filed a Title IX complaint. Later, when Mr. Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak at the University of California at Berkeley, the university warned students that he might “target individuals, either in the audience or by using their personal information in a way that causes them to become human targets.”

But if campus leaders wait for that threshold to be reached before reacting, they may minimize the experience of the students who are targeted by the words they find offensive.

“That is one of the biggest challenges for public universities,” said Mr. Tyner. “How do you deal with speech that is offensive and hateful, but not actionable?”

Know Who’s in Charge

In cases of campus sexual assault, it’s usually clear who’s responsible for handling complaints: the Title IX coordinator. When concerns about campus speakers crop up, though, presidents, student-affairs officials, and public-safety officers on and off campus all may have a role to play.

“Like any good process on campus, it must be a partnership,” said Denzil J. Suite, vice president for student life at the University of Washington. Last January a protest of a speech there by Mr. Yiannopoulos, attended by many outsiders, turned violent. One man, who was not affiliated with the university, was shot and wounded. “Generally,” Mr. Tyner said, “we involve local law enforcement when we believe the surrounding community will be affected or if we expect large numbers of non-university-affiliated individuals.”

Mr. Tyner said universities need to figure out who makes the call on the ground about whether an event has become unsafe and should be broken up. Universities should also establish criteria for how to make that call and for how to decide when to get public-safety officers involved.

Establishing ownership isn’t just a matter of handling security in the moment, Mr. Kruger added. When an ugly incident takes place, boards of trustees are increasingly being held accountable, he said. That means that it’s important for student-affairs leaders to open lines of communication with their boards before an event happens. Officials can — and, in some cases, already do — educate their boards about the complexity of the free-speech, campus-climate, and security issues and, in some cases, review scenarios with the board to establish a consensus on how administrators should respond to an incident.

Choose Venues Wisely

University leaders have some degree of control over where events on their campuses take place, and they would be wise to examine which venues can safely accommodate crowds and protests. Mr. Suite said venues should provide easy access for emergency vehicles and have multiple entrances so speakers get in and out without going through a crowd. There should also be enough space for a peaceful protest to take place nearby.

“You wouldn’t want to put an event near classrooms or the health center,” he said. “We have to be thoughtful in terms of how we help events take place.”

In some more difficult cases, speakers like Mr. Yiannopoulos come uninvited by the university or anyone affiliated with it. Still, it falls to campus officials to make sure the events are safe.

“Groups have figured out that they can plan an event and the university has to figure out how to provide security,” Mr. Tyner said.

Richard B. Spencer, a white supremacist, has given talks at Texas A&M University and Auburn University within the past year. In both cases he came without an invitation from current students, faculty, or administrators and drew supporters who were unaffiliated with the institutions. Citing safety concerns, Auburn attempted to cancel the talk, but Mr. Spencer fought the decision and a judge ruled in his favor.

Both of those universities had policies allowing outsiders to rent out some campus spaces; after Mr. Spencer’s visit, Texas A&M revised its policy in an attempt to prevent future incidents. “A university doesn’t have resources to be the place where every controversial group can hold their rally,” said Mr. Tyner. He said he expects university leaders to reconsider whether “it’s wise to monetize all those facilities.”

Seek Student Support

Ms. Rue said university leaders should be in contact with students — both those who may feel threatened by a potential speaker and those who have helped organize or are in favor of the event. When the Wake Forest chapter of Turning Point USA hosted Kimberly Corban, a sexual-assault survivor who advocates for gun rights as a way for women to protect themselves, Ms. Rue said, her office stayed in touch with the community of assault survivors on campus.

“For the survivor community, that can feel like victim blaming,” Ms. Rue said of Ms. Corban’s position. “We had counselors available and made sure they understood the nature of the event.”

Ultimately, that talk did not generate a groundswell of opposition, Ms. Rue said. But when one does, universities can hold a counter event as a way to give voice to an opposing view or set of values. When Mr. Spencer came to Texas A&M, the university’s president, Michael K. Young, organized an alternative event, called “Aggies United,” which featured various artists and speakers, including a Holocaust survivor.

Mr. Tyner said one of his proudest moments at the University of Mississippi came when a white-supremacist group came on campus. A group of students responded by turning their backs on the group and reading the university’s creed in unison.

“There were plenty of people yelling and screaming,” he said. “But this counter demonstration was the very best of it.”

Following a sensible playbook can help colleges when controversy comes to campus. But even with the right venue, a plan for who makes the calls on the ground, and good communication with students, there’s no guarantee colleges can keep contentious events from turning violent.

Mr. Suite said that even after the Yiannopoulos event, there’s little he would change about the University of Washington’s policies or protocols. Still, someone was shot. There’s a lesson there, too: The public’s presence is a factor that universities can only do so much to control.

Nell Gluckman writes about faculty issues and other topics in higher education. You can follow her on Twitter @nellgluckman, or email her at nell.gluckman@chronicle.com.