On Friday evening, Chancellor Carol Folt, along with several other administrators, sent the third campuswide email regarding House Bill 2. Finally, university leaders took a true stance on the issue, saying, in part, “we don’t agree with the Act” rather than vaguely alluding to uncontroversial values.
This is quite possibly the most political stance Folt has ever taken during her nearly three years as chancellor.
It is a stance that might have had more impact had it come sooner than it did, especially considering that it was revealed after 7 p.m. on a Friday, more than two weeks after it was signed into law.
Nonetheless, we are proud of our chancellor for taking the time to stand with our community in its condemnation of this ridiculous law.
We must also say that anything less than the outright condemnation and noncompliance of this bill will inevitably dehumanize the people most obviously affected by this bill, transgender individuals. But, as an editorial board, we appreciated the fact that Folt took a stance, and we understand the political and legal considerations that restrain her and her team from making more forceful statements.
Ideally, the University system, from Folt to Margaret Spellings, would take a bolder stance on House Bill 2.
However, thinking systemically, we must also recognize the limitations that our university administrators are under. Unfortunately, we are governed by the N.C. General Assembly. We recognize the seriousness with which Folt takes her position and the necessity to avoid provoking retaliatory policies from the NCGA onto the University in the same manner that Charlotte has experienced.
It is a shame we must live in a highly politicized culture in which opposing bigotry and discrimination is considered a partisan political issue, but sadly we do.
Spellings as well deserves some credit for signaling that she had problems with the law.
