Summary: Student Government August 2026 Fence Policy Memorandum

Background

During the 2025-2026 academic year, President Jahanian convened a Fence Working Group (FWG) to examine the Fence's history, suggest approaches to its regulation, and support and improve its use for future generations of students. The FWG included students, faculty, staff, and alumni nominated by Student Government, Faculty Senate, the Alumni Association Board, and Staff Council. The FWG was charged with “considering how the Fence can continue to serve as a meaningful campus tradition while ensuring clarity, accountability and respect for its roles, and the boundaries of its roles, within our diverse community,” and, furthermore, to “consider the history of the Fence as well as CMU’s commitments to academic freedom and freedom of expression.” The FWG delivered its Final Report to President Jahanian in May 2026.

In response to the FWG’s Report and to general discourse surrounding several of the paintings on the Fence during Summer 2026, Student Government Leadership convened to discuss current practices, deliberate future directions, and determine a path forward for the governance over the Fence historically shared between Student Government and University Administration. In late August 2026, we delivered a memo to the Office of the President summarizing our responses to key parts of the FWG’s Report and suggesting ideas for the operationalization of continued shared governance over the Fence, including processes for making joint decisions regarding the Fence.

Summary of Suggestions

The full memorandum provided to University Administration is available to read as a document above. We provide a summary of our suggestions below:

Bilateral Restraint: The Fence Working Group’s Report highlights the positive impact that bilateral restraint has in terms of the Fence. Student Government Leadership affirms the FWG’s points about the crucial importance of bilateral restraint. We encourage University Administration to hesitate before intervening by removing content on the Fence, including messages that may upset some community members or at times when community members express discomfort over messages.

Content Allowed on the Fence: Content allowed on the Fence is not any more constrained than other on-campus speech, and content prohibited on the Fence follows the same constraints as other on-campus speech, including what is outlined in the Graffiti and Poster Policy and the Freedom of Expression Policy. There are some types of content that are not permissible on the Fence because they violate University Policies, the Student Handbook, or the law. 

Interventions Over the Fence: We outline our suggestions for protocols for intervening when prohibited content is painted on the Fence or a procedural violation occurs and further suggest that these protocols should include a transparent record of interventions available to our community. We have organized interventions into three broad categories: Procedural Interventions, Joint Interventions, and Emergency Interventions. 

• Procedural Intervention: A Procedural Intervention is necessary when there has been a violation of the Graffiti and Poster Policy. Historically and currently, when a Procedural Intervention is necessary, Student Government Leadership has led the response. We suggest that minimal changes, if any, be made to the current execution of such interventions, but will also work to clarify our role in responding to procedural violations.

• Joint Intervention: When either Student Government or University Administration become aware of content on the Fence that may be prohibited, Student Government Leadership suggests processes for a Joint Intervention between Administration and Student Government Leadership. We emphasize the need for Student Government Leadership to meet with Administration to discuss and agree on a response to potentially prohibited messages. 

• Emergency Intervention: As detailed in the FWG’s Report, University Administration has the legal authority to unilaterally intervene over the Fence at any time, whether through removal of a message for content-related reasons or by creating additional time, place, and manner restrictions over the Fence. However, Student Government Leadership strongly affirms the recommendation of the FWG that Administration should intervene with the Fence unilaterally only in rare and extreme circumstances.