A controversial bill will force higher education institutions to devise an academic bill of rights for students and faculty, and design repercussions for alleged violations.

Introduced by state Sen. Larry A. Mumper on Jan. 26, the bill states that its intention is to protect the consciouses, and the freedoms of speech, expression, and assembly of students. In addition, the bill will prevent discrimination on the basis of political, ideological or religious beliefs. 

Also, faculty will be prohibited from introducing into a classroom controversial material that is not directly related to the subject, and institutions will be forced to remain neutral on political and religious disputes.

The Republican from Marion said his motivation for introducing the bill was to make sure the rights of students are being respected.

Opening up free speech is a way students can express their opinions without fear of retribution on their grades, Mumper said.

He also said opinions that do not pertain to a class should not be discussed.

Although universities have regulations, they are often not enforced and legislation is in their best interest, Mumper said.

If the bill is passed, the board of trustees at each university can set up a moderating system of its own to ensure adherence to the regulations, Mumper said.

He added that universities would be able to set up their own penalties but would have to present meaningful results.

Mumper has faced considerable opposition from educators, students, and civil rights groups. In particular, the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio has encouraged people to speak out against the bill and contact leaders of the Senate Education Committee.

Although he based parts of his legislation on ideas by the American Association of University Professors, they have written a letter in opposition to the bill, Mumper said.

In February, 40 students gathered on the OSU Marion campus to voice their opposition, according to a report by the Marion Star on Feb. 10.

At the meeting, students said they should be able to make their own choices and suggested that regulations should be handled by the school.

Mumper acknowledged there are students who already have formed their own views.

“Obviously, students come to college with a whole different range of backgrounds, many of them very astute, and do have the capability of expressing their own opinion,” Mumper said.

He also said he believes some students, especially younger individuals, still need to be protected by regulation to ensure that they are exposed to differing viewpoints.

“Many do need the opportunity to see different sides of arguments, to be educated rather than indoctrinated,” Mumper said.

In response to criticism from educators, he said many professors are confused about the intentions of the bill.

“This opens up free speech in the classroom, and does not infringe on professors’ rights,” he said.

Mumper said he is mainly concerned with professors that present their opinion but won’t allow students to voice theirs.

“It does not apply to all professors even though most of them are liberal,” he said.

Mumper also said certain forms of speech should be kept where appropriate.

For example, in humanities and social studies classes, where the syllabus says that contrasting views come up in class, anything is fair game, he said.

Despite facing strong opposition, Mumper has received support from some students.

At a general education committee hearing on Tuesday, two students — one from OSU Marion and another from Ohio University — testified as proponents of the bill.

USG President Aftab Pureval opposed the bill.

“In my mind, the bill is unnecessary, unproductive, and would only serve to do exactly the opposite of what it is trying to do,” Pureval said. “It would censor professors and hold down dialogue between students and their colleagues.”

The USG senate has responded by introducing a resolution that opposes the bill, Pureval said.