Utah college students could turn down assignments based on ‘religious and conscience beliefs’ under this bill

Note to readers • The Salt Lake Tribune is making this story about the Utah Legislature free to all. Donate to support our nonprofit newsroom.

A debate class that asks a student to argue in favor of abortion.

An art assignment that involves drawing a nude figure.

A film class that screens a movie with profane language.

Or a science course where animal dissection is required.

These are the kind of assignments that a Utah lawmaker believes college students should be empowered to opt out of if the coursework violates their “sincerely held religious and conscience beliefs.”

Rep. Mike Petersen, R-Logan, introduced the measure, HB204, which would create a set process for “belief accommodation.”

Under the bill, students at the state’s eight public colleges and universities would be able to object to a required assignment on moral grounds. And professors, in most cases, would be need to accommodate — either by excusing participation or offering an alternative option.

Petersen said he decided to run the bill after his daughter, who is completing a master of social work program outside of Utah, was required as part of her coursework to write a letter to a local lawmaker advocating in favor of pro-LGBTQ policies.

She was “thrown off by that,” Petersen said, and he worried the same kind of thing was happening in Utah. He said his intern this legislative session also told him about having to watch a movie for class that had explicit content.

But there is a power dynamic at play, he added, where students don’t feel like they can raise concerns without affecting their grade or becoming subject to unfair treatment.

“Students often, if not typically, see themselves as beholden to their professors,” Petersen said Wednesday when he presented his bill in a committee hearing. “These students are often put in a difficult position.”

The measure passed the House Education Committee in an 8-1 vote, with the only Democrat present — Rep. Carol Moss — voting against. Six members were absent. The bill moved on to the full House for consideration.

Petersen, though, insisted the measure wasn’t based on political party: “This is not an issue for the right or the left. This will protect all of our students.”

Last year, the Legislature put in place a similar measure, providing “conscience protection” for state government employees — also sponsored by Petersen — where an individual could be relieved of a job task they feel goes against their “belief as to the rightness or wrongness of an action or inaction.”

Petersen was accompanied Wednesday by Robin Wilson, a law professor at the University of Illinois, who joined the meeting online. She said if a student wants to challenge an assignment now, they have a First Amendment right against “compelled speech.” But if a professor doesn’t agree an assignment would amount to that, the student’s only recourse is typically having to hire an attorney to fight it.

She also pushed Petersen to expand his bill beyond just religion to also include conscience to accommodate, for example, something like a health student morally being opposed to clean needle exchanges for drug users.

The bill does provide some limits on the accommodations that can be made. For instance, if a required assignment is fundamental to learning the course materials or an alteration would significantly impact the requirements for a program, then a request can be denied.

Schools are supposed to have a neutral party weigh in if a professor and student disagree.

Wilson said the bill isn’t meant to let someone who is a climate change denier, for instance, major in climate science and get out of every assignment.

Opposition from faculty

Several professors from across the state attended the committee hearing Wednesday and spoke out against the bill.

Rick McDonald, a professor at Utah Valley University, said he worries about the openness of what might qualify as a conscience objection. He also said universities are supposed to challenge students to see new things they may not otherwise encounter, based on their worldviews.

“Beliefs are important,” he said. “But the mission of higher education is to expose a student to the best course of knowledge in a field of study.”

Gabe Byers, at Salt Lake Community College, similarly said the bill would decrease the “viewpoint diversity” — something the Legislature has pushed for — that students actually engage with. Several faculty members pointed out the impacts that eliminating assignments could have on programs getting and maintaining accreditation.

HB204 would also “compound the chilling effects Utah is already experiencing” from banning diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, efforts in higher education, added Joe LaSure, a faculty member at Utah State University. That previous measure passed by the Legislature has led some professors to dramatically change their curriculum to avoid any hot-button issues.

“We cannot deliver content,” he said, “in a climate of fear.”

Those in favor

State Rep. Jason Thompson, R-River Heights, pushed back on LaSure’s comments.

“Students should not be forced to receive an education in a climate of fear,” he said.

Thompson said the protections provided under HB204 are valuable and the state needs to protect students first. What faculty said during the meeting, he added, he found “a little bit alarming.”

Rep. Karianne Lisonbee, R-Syracuse, also challenged the faculty comments, brushing off those who spoke against the bill for making “very inaccurate” statements. But she didn’t specify what she felt was wrong.

“This is a good bill,” she said. “It does not enact any censorship.”

Wilson said the measure protects against changes to curriculum that could threaten a program’s accreditation. The bill also has the favor of the conservative Utah Eagle Forum, which advocates for religious freedom.

The forum’s president, Gayle Ruzicka, said her daughter once did have to argue in a debate class in favor of abortion, and it was a “pretty devastating” experience for her. The family fought the assignment, Ruzicka said, but it was difficult.

The bill requires schools to report assignment objections and their outcomes to the Utah Board of Higher Education, which will then prepare an annual accounting to the Legislature.

The measure is one of two on religious freedom in higher education. A second bill, SB207, comes from Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Highland. It hasn’t been debated yet this session, but it would similarly require a college or university to accommodate for a student’s “religious beliefs, faith, or conscience” in regards to admissions, attendance, scheduling of exams and participation in assignments.