I graduate from the University of Michigan Law School on May 7. The school has invited U.S. Senator Rob Portman to speak at the ceremony. Because of Senator Portman’s views on civil rights and equality, particularly those affecting women and the gay community, many of my colleagues at the law school are upset by the school’s decision to invite him. To register their disapproval of the Senator’s views, some of my colleagues at the law school are considering a walkout during the Senator’s speech.
I am against a walkout for three reasons. First, this is my day to celebrate my achievements of the past three years. Second, I have concerns about outing those members of the gay community who may not be out to the friends and family attending the ceremony. Finally, it may be inappropriate to take advantage of a captive audience to present an unclear message. I’ll flesh each of these out in turn.
Before getting into the reasons though, I want to explain what this post is not about. To the extent that I know his politics, I disagree with the Senator’s views on civil rights and equality. My anti-walkout stance has nothing to do with support for Senator Portman. I am open to less disruptive forms of protest. And I strongly encourage gestures of solidarity with my classmates.
Now to my first reason not to walk out. Each member of my class has worked his or her ass off to earn a JD, and May 7 is our day to celebrate as a group. In addition, I see May 7 as my day. For me, this is a day to reflect on achievements and struggles, to be proud of what I have accomplished, and to recognize family and friends who have supported me. The day will be what each of us makes of it.
I do not anticipate that Senator Portman will use his platform at graduation to further an agenda of inequality. One has a choice as to whether Senator Portman’s mere presence will ruin the day. My choice is not to let this happen. I should also note that neither will I let a walkout ruin my day, but such a spectacle will be harder to ignore.
My second reason concerns members of the gay community who are not out to their non–law school friends and family. (I should note that I am not gay, and my impressions might be well off the mark.) I assume the existence of a subset of the gay community at the law school consisting of people who are not out at home. These students, especially if they are out at school, may feel strong connections both with fellow gay students and with other supporters of gay rights and equality.
If this is true, a walkout puts these students in an uncomfortable situation. Their decision may not be as simple as choosing between remaining seated and walking out. They may feel like they have to choose between remaining silent and outing themselves. The presence of this choice should not be dispositive, but I believe it merits consideration by those considering walking out.
My final reason has to do with the propriety of planning a distraction and disruption before a captive audience. On May 7 a large group of people will convene in Ann Arbor to honor the law school class of 2011. They will not convene to see the remarks of the junior Senator from Ohio, nor to see the protest of a group of law students. I do not think that May 7 should be a day for advancing a substantive agenda.
I presume that Senator Portman recognizes that this is not a political rally and will comport himself accordingly. If Senator Portman’s remarks reflect hostility toward civil rights or equality, I will consider walking out. To me, this is different from a planned walkout because I would have no advance time to consider more productive avenues of combatting such speech. For those offended by his mere presence, however, the walkout reflects an effort to advance a substantive agenda of civil rights and equality.
As such, I think it is fair to judge the propriety of the walkout on whether such an action actually advances civil rights and equality. I tend to think it will do no such thing. Instead, it will distract people from the ceremony as several berobed students stand up and walk toward aisles, likely generating further commotion as they stumble over seated classmates.
In sum, I am against the walkout because I want May 7 to be about me rather than about Senator Portman, I do not want to force existential decisionmaking on any classmates, and I believe that the walkout is a poorly conceived way of conveying support for civil rights and equality. For these reasons, I plan to remain seated during the Senator’s remarks.
