Will MU's New Homecoming Parade Policy Address Concerns from Muslim Rights Group?

The University of Missouri has revised its application process for the homecoming parade, following controversy surrounding its previous denial of participation to Mizzou Students for Justice in Palestine (MSJP). The changes reflect a new theme intended to celebrate university traditions, while raising questions about free expression and inclusivity within university events.

Last updated: 28 October 2023 (BST)

Key Takeaways

• The University of Missouri has updated its homecoming parade policies following backlash from the denial of MSJP's application.
• CAIR filed a lawsuit on behalf of MSJP, citing First Amendment violations.
• The new parade theme is “Celebrating Black and Gold,” focusing on university traditions and achievements.
• The university claims that changes to parade rules are routine and not specifically aimed at MSJP.
• Concerns about safety and precedent from other institutions influenced the university's decisions.

Background of the Controversy

In August, Mizzou Students for Justice in Palestine (MSJP) announced via social media that the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) had filed a lawsuit against the university. This legal action was prompted by President Mun Choi’s denial of MSJP’s application to participate in the 2024 homecoming parade. Choi cited previous disturbances caused by similar groups at other universities as a reason for the denial.

In his correspondence with MSJP, Choi highlighted concerns for safety, stating that “significant disturbances” had been reported at events linked to the group elsewhere in the country. He suggested that these incidents, along with actions taken by some MSJP members at a previous event, led to the decision to deny their application. Choi did, however, offer the group an alternative location to express their views on the day of the parade.

Comparative Denials

Documents obtained by ABC 17 News revealed that MSJP was not the only group denied participation. The university also rejected applications from the Labourers’ International Union of North America (LiUNA) and the League of Women Voters, citing reasons such as high registration numbers, concerns about parade length, and a priority system favouring MU student groups.

These denials raise questions about consistency and fairness in the application process. For instance, MSJP claimed that the university had previously requested they refrain from carrying a banner stating “END THE GENOCIDE,” while allowing other groups, such as fraternities, to display politically charged slogans like “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.” This perceived double standard has intensified claims of discrimination and violations of the First Amendment rights.

Legal Response from CAIR

Gadeir Abbas, deputy litigation director at CAIR National, voiced strong criticism of the university's actions. He characterised the exclusion of MSJP from the parade as a “blatant violation” of constitutional rights. The lawsuit filed by CAIR seeks not only legal redress for the alleged violation but also a commitment from the University of Missouri to prevent a recurrence of such exclusions in future events.

Updated Parade Policies

In response to the uproar, the University of Missouri has revised its homecoming parade policy, introducing a theme of “Celebrating Black and Gold.” This new directive outlines the parade’s purposes, which include celebrating university traditions, fostering alumni connections, and promoting the homecoming football game.

The updated policy explicitly states that the parade is “not an open forum for expression on topics identified by participants,” but rather is limited to expressions aligned with the university’s mission and themes. This has created a framework where the university maintains control over the narrative presented during the parade.

University's Justification

During a recent faculty council meeting, President Choi defended the new parade theme, explaining that this year’s changes aim to encourage participants to align their displays and performances with the university's traditions. He stated, “The major difference from last year is that we have a theme, and we ask that all of the parade participants tailor the displays.”

A university spokesperson later emphasised that changes to parade policies are customary and not targeted at any specific group. Christopher Ave noted, “Adherence to the theme is not limited to any one group, and the rules do apply to all participants.” This assertion aims to clarify that the university’s intent is not discriminatory but rather about maintaining a cohesive celebration of MU's heritage.

Implications of Policy Changes

The changes to the homecoming parade application process have sparked a debate about freedom of expression on university campuses. Critics argue that the university's restrictions on what can be expressed during the parade could stifle important conversations and representation of diverse viewpoints. The tension between safety concerns and the right to free expression remains a contentious issue for many students and advocacy groups.

MSJP’s situation highlights broader concerns about how universities navigate political expression among student groups, especially those advocating for social justice. The implications are significant, as they touch on issues of inclusivity, representation, and the university's role in facilitating or hindering public discourse.

What’s Next for MSJP and the University?

As the legal proceedings unfold, the future participation of MSJP in the homecoming parade remains uncertain. The university's commitment to revising its policies may be tested by the outcome of the lawsuit and the ongoing discussions about free speech on campus. It will be crucial for the University of Missouri to balance safety and inclusivity as it implements its updated policies.

Moreover, the national spotlight on this issue could prompt other universities to reassess their own policies regarding student group participation and expression in public events. The outcome of this situation may set crucial precedents for how universities approach similar conflicts in the future.

Conclusion

The changes to the University of Missouri's homecoming parade policy signify a complex interplay between tradition, safety, and free speech. As universities continue to navigate these issues, the outcome of this situation will likely have lasting effects on campus culture and the rights of student organisations. Will other universities follow suit in creating stricter guidelines, or will they prioritise inclusivity and expression? Only time will tell.

#UniversityofMissouri #HomecomingParade #FreeSpeech

FAQs

What changes did the University of Missouri make to its homecoming parade policy?

The University of Missouri updated its homecoming parade policy to introduce a specific theme, “Celebrating Black and Gold,” and clarified that the parade is not an open forum for all expressions but rather focuses on university traditions and achievements.

Why was Mizzou Students for Justice in Palestine denied participation in the parade?

Mizzou Students for Justice in Palestine was denied participation due to concerns about safety and disturbances linked to similar groups at other universities, according to President Mun Choi's letter.

What legal action has been taken regarding the denial of MSJP's application?

CAIR has filed a lawsuit on behalf of MSJP, claiming that the denial of their application violates their First Amendment rights and seeking a commitment from the university to prevent similar exclusions in the future.

How does the university justify the changes to its parade rules?

The university claims that changes to parade rules are standard practice each year and are not specifically aimed at any group. The aim is to encourage participants to align their displays with the chosen theme.

What are the implications of the updated parade policy for student expression?

The updated parade policy raises concerns about limiting free speech and representation of diverse viewpoints, prompting a debate about the balance between safety and the right to express political opinions on campus.