Although the university encourages students and faculty to share opinions and ideas with one another, limited rights often prevent them from fully embracing these ideas.

Some students and faculty members are finding their right to freely express themselves is exceedingly restrictive, and many are working to ensure their academic freedom is improved.

Charles Rickert, a senior in the College of Business Administration, is working for the approval of a group called Students for Academic Freedom.

"I'm worried that the progress is going to be slow," Rickert said.

According to Rickert, more than 25 students have signed a petition to establish the group as an organization. The group submitted a constitution to the Office of Student Development about two weeks ago, he said. Kelly Neumann, coordinator for student organizations and leadership programs, must approve the constitution before the group can move any further, he said.

The group plans to encourage intellectual diversity on campus, defend students' rights, encourage equality in student affairs and establish a student bill of rights.

"To me, the university is a place where you can come and find new ideas," he said.

If approved, the group will provide complaint forms for students who wish to document complaints toward the university, Rickert said. The group will also note and object to any acts it believes infringe upon academic freedom, and will report the acts to students and faculty, he said.

The organization will also work with Marquette Student Government to pass a student bill of rights, Rickert said. He said he was disappointed when the student bill of rights composed by MUSG last semester did not pass, and it is something he will strive to get approved, he said.

The idea for the group was started because "we saw a need for greater free speech on campus," he said.

While no one event led to the idea for the group, several occurrences at the university have left some students and faculty disgruntled with their lack of free speech rights.

Stuart Ditsler, a philosophy teaching assistant, posted a quotation on his office door in September that was removed by James South, chair of the philosophy department, without his consent, Ditsler said.

According to Ditsler, South said if material was "patently offensive," he had little choice but to remove it. According to Ditsler, South also said hallways and offices were not "free speech zones."

Although the incident may have seemed to infringe upon Ditsler's free speech rights, South had a right to remove the quotation, according to James Scotton, associate professor of journalism.

"The first amendment says you are protected from the government restricting your free expression, and Marquette is not the government," he said.

According to Scotton, Marquette faculty and students' free speech rights are restricted because it is a private institution. Members of the Marquette community are not protected against acts of censorship by private institutions, he said.

"People have bad feelings about censorship, even if it may be legal," he said.

Another controversial incident that elicited debate over free speech occurred in February 2005 when the university forced the College Republicans to remove an "Adopt a Sniper" fundraising table in the Alumni Memorial Union.

University officials said the group could not set up its table because the program's message did not align with the university's mission. The issue raised debates over whether the university had the right to shut down the display.

A case in December 2005 in which a School of Dentistry student was suspended for comments he made on a blog also raised debate over students' free speech rights. Theodore Schrubbe, a second-year dental student at the time, faced losing his scholarship and repeating his semester as a result of the comments he made about students and professors. The decision was eventually overturned.

The incident sparked questions concerning free speech for students and faculty. The student's suspension forced many students to rethink their attempts to express personal opinions and ideas out of fear the university would take action.