Cal State Students Help Kill ‘60s Law Censuring Protests

When most of today’s college students were in diapers, or not even born, a state law aimed at curbing 1960s-era campus protests was passed.

Though widely considered unconstitutional, the 18-year-old law was in effect until a group of Cal State Fullerton students successfully took it upon themselves this year to get rid of it. As a result of their efforts, Gov. George Deukmejian earlier this month signed a bill repealing the law.

The provisions in the law said a student could lose financial aid if he or she “commits any act likely to disrupt” a state-supported campus.

“They were a period piece from the 1960s--something to curb student activity,” said Sherry Skelly, legislative director of the California State Student Assn., a Sacramento-based organization that lobbies for students in the 19-campus California State University system. She added: “The laws didn’t say what it meant by ‘likely to disrupt.’ ”

The law, as far as anyone could determine, had never been invoked. No court cases challenging it could be found.

But it was the law. And at least one student at Cal State Fullerton, Charles Hollis, was fearful enough about it that he refused to participate in last year’s campus protests of the production of racist television tapings on campus by former Ku Klux Klan leader Tom Metzger. The protests demanding that the university oust Metzger and his “Race and Reason” TV show were staged by the Coalition Against Apartheid in March and April of last year. Metzger and the tapings ultimately moved off campus to a community television studio.

Hollis told members of the coalition about the statute. Leaders of the group made further inquiries about the law, which they found affects all students at any public higher-education campus in the state. “The financial aid office told us not to worry about it, but Charles was still concerned,” said Mike Vicencia, a coalition member who is the son of former Assemblyman Frank Vicencia (D-Bellflower). The coalition inquired further about the law with Cal State Fullerton administrators, who made it clear that the statute would not be invoked. So Hollis went ahead and participated in the protests.

But it still bothered Vicencia and Ray Spencer, president of Cal State Fullerton’s student government in 1986. When Vicencia later became director of legislative affairs of Cal State Fullerton’s Associated Students, he brought it up to the student board. “We just thought that was wrong,” said Vicencia, who is now a law student in Sacramento. “If someone was getting financial aid and was aware of this clause, they may very well have hesitated to participate on campus. And we would never know.”

Spencer and Vicencia, who graduated in June, took their message to the California State Student Assn., and the group agreed to help with legislation.

“These things sit around and people dredge them up at some volatile period and use them,” said Skelly.

State Sen. Nicholas Petris (D-Oakland), who often champions civil-liberties causes, agreed to sponsor the repeal bill for the student association.

As a part of the process, the legislative counsel office issued an opinion that the 1969 statute was an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech.

The repeal measure passed the Senate 39 to 0 and the Assembly 56 to 17. It will become effective Jan. 1.

Cal State Fullerton President Jewel Plummer Cobb on Tuesday said she was pleased that the governor had signed the Petris legislation.

“I’m proud that our students were active in the process,” Cobb said. “We cannot tolerate a statute that intimidates students.”

“The statute had never been used in anybody’s memory in the system,” said Scott Plotkin of the CSU governmental affairs office, which was neutral on the bill. “But it did come into play with some students who realized this was in the law.”

He added, “If it’s never going to be used and there’s a feeling it’s unconstitutional, why not get rid of it?”