|
Dear University of Oregon community,
The United States has historically attracted and welcomed people from around the globe who helped build our nation, made scientific discoveries, contributed to the arts, fueled our economy, and created our diverse civic culture. Our nation’s first president, George Washington, observed that the “bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respected stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges . . .” Part of the University of Oregon’s mission, as a public institution, is to continue to support this tradition by bringing the best and the brightest here to be part of a rich and vibrant community of scholars.
Academic excellence and global engagement go hand in hand at the UO. By continuing our long history of welcoming eager, talented scholars from many countries, we draw global perspectives into our community and enrich the educational experience. By sending 25 percent of every graduating class to study abroad or participate in overseas internships, we widen our worldview, develop cross-cultural skills, and prepare students for a global economy.
We are troubled by the decision of the new US administration to begin a process of closing our borders by indefinitely banning refugees from Syria, placing a 120-day ban on refugees from all over the world, blocking new visas from seven predominantly Muslim countries (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen) for 90 days, and signaling a religious test for admittance of new refugees. The UO is proudly committed to welcoming talented individuals from all countries to study, teach, and carry out research and scholarship on our campus. We stand with the Association of American Universities in supporting a visa system that “prevents entry by those who wish to harm us, while maintaining the inflow of talent that has contributed so much to our nation.”
Many in our community are worried that recent executive orders send the wrong message about our country. Many are concerned for our fellow students, faculty members, and staff members from the targeted countries. If you feel vulnerable and unwanted because of the US president’s actions, please know that you are welcome and appreciated at the UO. You are part of our community, and we stand with you in defense of our shared values of inclusion, equity, curiosity about the world, and global engagement as core to academic excellence.
Like other public research universities across the nation, the UO welcomes and supports students without regard for immigration status. We clearly stated this as our leadership signed onto a statement by our University Senate on November 16, 2016. The university is now in the process of creating an administrative position within the Division of Student Life that will be a point of contact and a resource for undocumented students and those covered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
More recently, we have been working to make sure the most directly affected members of our community receive our full support:
- Last week we communicated directly with students, faculty and staff members from the seven countries targeted for a 90-day visa ban, recommending these students avoid travel outside the US, given the ban and ensuing uncertainty.
- We identified all of our students currently on UO study-abroad or overseas internships. While none are from the seven targeted countries, five are non-US citizens, and we are working to ensure their smooth return to campus at the end of their international academic programs.
- A few UO academic units are about to admit graduate students from the seven targeted countries. We also have undergraduate applicants and potential American English Institute applicants from these countries. We will work to maintain the academic integrity of the admissions process (seek and welcome the best candidates, with an eye toward equity and inclusion), while also acknowledging that the UO cannot control the issuance of US entry visas at embassies and consulates abroad. We will signal willingness to work with these newly admitted students and applicants, on a case-by-case basis, to explore every option available, as we gain more clarity on visa policies to follow the 90-day ban.
- We will hold a town hall on changing immigration rules at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, January 30, in the EMU Ballroom. Experts on international immigration will review the current state of affairs, answer questions, and reinforce the core message that this university cares deeply about international and undocumented students. The event is open to all.
We know many people may have questions and concerns. We will soon provide a list of frequently asked questions on UO policies and programs related to international students, faculty and staff members. In addition, the following individuals are available to answer questions:
- General questions about international policies and programs at the UO can be directed to Vice Provost Dennis Galvan in the Office of International Affairs, [email protected] or 541-346-5851
- International students and visiting scholars can contact Abe Schafermeyer, director of International Student and Scholar Services, [email protected] or 541-346-1215
- International employees may contact international employment specialist Jennifer Doreen, [email protected] or 541-346-2638, or Bill Brady, assistant vice president for employee and labor relations, [email protected] or 541-346-2305
As we have stated so often recently, the UO remains committed to fostering an academic environment that is inclusive and welcoming to all, and it bears repeating that this commitment includes our international students, faculty, and staff.
Sincerely,
Michael H. Schill
President and Professor of Law
Scott Coltrane
Provost and Senior Vice President
|
“However, about 150 protesters started an unscheduled march through downtown, blocking streets. At one point they damaged a truck parked at West 11th Avenue that was displaying a Trump flag.”
big·ot·ry
ˈbiɡətrē/
noun
intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
Even if we agree that bigotry directed at bigots is somehow equivalent to bigotry directed at ethnic minorities, how does the existence of the former justify the existence of the latter? Intolerance is not a relative concept, nor does it demand tolerance itself.
And by the way, I was there. The truck had previously tried to run over protestors.
It’s a strange world indeed when the Koch brothers might be the ones to put a stop to this craziness.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/koch-network-poised-for-new-role–as-the-conservative-resistance-to-trump
Oregon should follow the example of Michigan which has declared they will resist Trumps attacks on immigrants.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/01/28/university-michigan-defies-trump-refusing-release-immigration-status-students.html
A fraught issue, no doubt. Badly handled by Trump, no doubt. Is it that much different from what Obama was actually doing? I’ll leave it to people who are both knowledgable and objective, if there are any.
Schill is coming close to supporting illegal immigration. If the feds actually are able to cut off funding, it will be interesting to see what UO and other campuses do. Along with the sanc cities.
My guess: they will fold like a cheap lawn chair.
According to ir.uoregon.edu 15% of the UO budget comes from Gifts, Grants & Contracts. I’d be curious to know of that how much is Federal grants. Even so, you have to wonder how much Federal research money will be available in a Trump administration given that he’s already frozen any funds from the EPA. Is it really worth compromising core University values in order to placate an aspiring autocrat in the hopes that he will direct some crumbs our way? Isn’t the function of a liberal arts institution in a democratic society to resist exactly that kind of pressure?
Federal research grants are something like $100 million per year, give or take. Science research at least would fold at UO without that money.
But it’s not just research grants. There’s also a great deal of Pell grant money for students, i.e. to pay our salaries. And don’t forget federal student loans. In short, we would be fucked if the money got cut off. So would virtually every other school in the country.
The technique of bringing out the old “liberal hypocrisy” name-calling whip on anyone who calls out Trump doesn’t work with me. It’s working less and less with a lot of people. In fact, people are getting pretty damned tired of it.
Nice try. Imitation the sincerest form of flattery and all that. It must feel terrible to be associated with something or whatever that has been called out for possible hypocrisy. We’ll see what eventuates.
Excluding immigration of people based on religion or country of origin is a direct violation of federal law, according to numerous judges and the (until recently) highest ranking lawyer in the country. But to you, it’s nothing more than a “fraught issue?”
Why is it that those who purport to care the most about the US Constitution and law and order are so willing to look the other way when the rights of others are ignored?
I said it’s a “fraught issue.” Perhaps legally, perhaps not. So too the issue of sanctuary universities and cities. I’ll leave all that to the lawyers, I’m not one. As I say, it will be interesting to watch what the universities do if called out.
My short answer is that if Michigan – which gets vastly more money from the federal government – can thread this needle, then we probably can too.
It is not supporting “illegal immigration”. It is focusing the university on its missions: teaching and research and declaring that immigration control is a federal responsibility, not a state responsibility, much less a state school responsibility.
That said, I do agree with Bernie that most schools will in the end fold like lawn chairs.
Illegal immigrants are not welcome in my country or at my school. I do not support sanctuary schools and I do not support U of O becoming one.
Respect our nation, respect our laws, come into our country correctly and legally. I did it when I was an international student, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask the same of the next generation.
Legal immigrants, legal visa holding workers, and legal visa holding students are all welcome in my country and at my school.
“Legal immigrants, legal visa holding workers, and legal visa holding students are all welcome in my country and at my school.”
Unless, of course, they’re Muslim. Then they aren’t welcome at all, visa or no visa.
I’m having a little trouble with that “respect the law” bit, though. What am I supposed to do when my xenophobia conflicts with the Constitution?
Duck, I think most Americans would agree with you, generally.
Quite a few Americans would support open borders — unlimited legal immigration — they can be found in certain circles in both major parties. (This is mostly separate from the questions around immigration policies and humanitarian concerns.)
To them, one might say, persuade your fellow Americans that this is what the country should do, and get Congress to write it into law.
In the meantime, to reiterate, I think most Americans would say that the country has the right to define its stance on immigration, and the laws should be obeyed.
I’m sure many Americans would say that “sanctuary cities and universities” cross a line over into active undermining of the national law, and coceivably leads to everything down that path. (Rebellion? Sedition? Secession? Civil war?)