Students Speak Out Against Police Presence in Dormitories

Critics of aggressive campus policing in general, and dorm patrols in particular, say that monitoring students' behavior inside residence halls is a blatant violation of students' civil liberties. Opponents maintain that dorms are inherently private areas, since the buildings are accessible only to students with keys and their guests. Therefore, they say, students should enjoy privacy on the premises and not have to worry about police officers lurking around the corner.

In the view of many opponents, both individual dorm rooms and dormitory hallways are the equivalent of students' private homes. As such, security personnel should not be permitted to enter such areas unless they have been summoned there for a specific reason, critics argue. "The hallway in a...dormitory is just like the hallway in your house that connects your bedroom to your bathroom," states Tim Esser, a lawyer from Washington State who defended the WSU student accused of property theft.

Other critics allege that dorm patrols work against many schools' stated goal of improving student safety on campus. Those opponents insist that by constantly keeping an eye on students' behavior, school security corps are making dorm residents feel less secure, rather than more secure. "It really infringes upon students' individual rights if they feel like they are being monitored," asserts Elvis Mendez, president of the Student Government Association at UMass Amherst. "We want to make sure students feel like this is their home."

Other critics of aggressive campus policing question the intentions of police officers who conduct dorm patrols. While opponents concede that curbing property theft and violent assaults are admirable goals, they maintain that many officers do not focus on such crimes. Rather, critics insist, many security personnel crack down randomly upon what many students claim are relatively innocent activities, such as recreational drug use or alcohol consumption. Criminal charges stemming from such crackdowns are particularly problematic, critics assert, because officers usually violate students' Fourth Amendment rights in order to obtain incriminating evidence.

"If you don't mind the police peeking in your window, going in the back yard and peeking around, then you probably won't mind" policemen in dormitories, says Steve Martonick, an attorney from Pullman, Wash., who represented the WSU student charged with drug possession. Referring to the arresting officer, he says that "apparently it was Officer Kuhrt's practice just to go up and down the hallways sniffing for marijuana."

Opponents insist that college police forces should not go out of their way to monitor students, even if such efforts are undertaken in the cause of enhancing campus safety. By patrolling students' residences, they say, college security forces are breaking the trust between students and the police. Instead of focusing their attention on regulating students' personal lives, critics say, colleges should allocate their professional and fiscal resources on a more important goal; providing the student body with a quality education. "This is a place of higher learning," says one anonymous UMass student, "not a place for police intimidation."

Sources

Bradley, Doug. "University of Wisconsin Recommends Policy Affirming Resident Assistant Rights, Responsibilities." University of Wisconsin System News, March 1, 2006, www.wisconsin.edu.

Powell, Bonnie. "Life in the Fishbowl." University of California at Berkeley News, March 3, 2003, www.berkeley.edu.

Rusconi, Peg. "UMass Students Protest Police Patrols in Dorms." CBS4 Boston, December 12, 2006, cbs4boston.com.