A University of Wisconsin-Madison investigation into Registered Student Organization (RSO) Animal Advocacy concluded July 7, finding the organization not responsible for soliciting burglary at Ridglan Farms but responsible for improper postings promoting a speaking event.
UW-Madison faced public pressure from Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Animal Activist Legal Defense Project (AALDP) and student groups including Students for Justice in Palestine throughout the investigation. Animal Advocacy was not found responsible for any violations of local, state or federal law regarding allegations of solicitation of burglary for their involvement in circulating a poster with a link to a blog prompting readers to steal beagles from Ridglan Farms, a beagle breeding facility with a history of animal cruelty charges.
The investigation did find Animal Advocacy responsible for improperly placing posters for an April 16 speaking event for Zoe Rosenberg, an animal rights activist, outside the Mosse Humanities building. The investigation said the posters violated UW-Madison’s Expressive Activity Policy.
As a result, the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards (OSCCS) issued light sanctions including a written reprimand to Animal Advocacy, stating that “any future misconduct by the group may result in a more serious disciplinary response from the university,” according to the official statement provided to The Daily Cardinal.
The university’s ruling comes following an official letter sent by FIRE to Chancellor Eric Wilcots on June 25, demanding an end to the investigation by July 9. The university ended its investigation July 7, two days before FIRE’s deadline.
“The results here give me hope that the university is taking a step in the right direction,” Amanda Nordstrom, Strategic Campaigns Council in Campus Rights Advocacy Department of FIRE, told The Daily Cardinal. “I hope going forward, the school does not go after students for their protected political advocacy… It was unfortunate to see these students even be brought up on these charges.”
Additionally, OSCCS issued an Educational Sanction requiring Animal Advocacy to review the Student Organization Resource & Policy Guide section on Posting, Chalking and Leafletting and create a one-page summary of the requirements for members to adhere to for future events.
“We're very happy to see that [UW-Madison] upheld the First Amendment,” Jackson Ray, Animal Advocacy’s president, told The Daily Cardinal. “I think this has now, in the opposite way, set a precedent that actually opens the door to hopefully make students feel emboldened and more comfortable with this sort of speech.”
Following the university’s investigation opening May 13, Ray and Animal Advocacy reached out to AALDP for legal representation. The basis of AALDP’s legal defense argued that Animal Advocacy's connection to activists Wayne Hsiung’s blog post encouraging stealing beagles was tenuous at best.
“Solicitation requires evidence of an unequivocal intent to encourage or ask someone else to commit a crime,” Steffen Seitz, an attorney working on the case at AALDP, told The Cardinal. “There's no way in which you could credibly claim that these students were trying to solicit people to engage in burglary.”
Seitz said that in addition to the post being closed for sign up prior to Animal Advocacy’s circulation of it, the string of links made for a weak argument that they directly incited any attempted burglary.
“Political situations in which emotions are running high, for issues that people care about deeply, that’s where the First Amendment really kicks in more than anywhere else,” Seitz said. “And it’s to prevent doing exactly what the university did here… trying to twist it in its worst possible way as a way to prohibit speech or to censor or punish speech.”
FIRE’s letter raised similar concerns about considering solicitation of burglary during the investigation.
“It's like this link to [in the document] that on a QR code that was scanned on a flyer, and simply including information and a link like that does not amount to encouraging illegal activity,” Nordstrom said.
The ruling brings hope to Animal Advocacy’s future endeavors, Ray said.
“Being investigated was a little scary for a lot of students,” Ray said. “It’s amazing that we were able to get very competent legal representation.”
Ray voiced his concern that many other organizations might not have the same resources to challenge the investigation.
“It’s easy to feel intimidated, or say the wrong things [or] follow the procedure improperly and so I'm just very grateful that we had [AALDP],” Ray said. “I think it’s just unfortunate that not every [organization] has that privilege.”
