Oberlin Community, College Reflect on Town-Gown Relationships Post Gibson's Litigation

Kushagra Kar Editor-in-Chief

Last week, Oberlin College announced it would pay Gibson’s Bakery the sum of $36.59 million in damages and attorney’s fees. With litigation now concluded, members of the community are reflecting on the circumstances of the original incident and the culmination of five years of litigation.

Karen Schaefer is an Oberlin resident who has worked as a freelance public radio journalist for the last 20 years and has written about the College on a number of occasions. Referencing her years of engagement with the College, she highlighted the unique attitude of students during the 2016 protests.

“What I discovered when I went downtown was that there were literally hundreds of students, first in front of Gibson’s, and then the police moved them across the street to the south side of Tappan Square, and none of them would talk to me ,” Schaefer said. “Eventually, I went into Gibson’s to find out something from them. They had nothing to say at that point. And so I left, but I left with a distinct impression that this was a different kind of protest than I’d ever seen before.”

Schaefer also commented on the distinct nature of the events as they related to the 2016 presidential election. Former President Donald Trump was elected Nov. 8, and students began protesting Nov. 10.

“You have to remember that this was the night after the election of 2016 had occurred,” Schaefer continued “I think everybody in this town, which is mostly liberal, was feeling pretty strongly about the outcome of the election. Pretty disappointed. ... I wonder if this protest would’ve gotten so large if it hadn’t come at the particular time...that it did, but who knows? That’s not a question we can answer now.”

Kristin Peterson, OC ’72, a fourth generation College student and current City Council member, echoed Schaefer’s sentiments about the position of the protests within the broader political context. She also expressed her dissatisfaction with the manner in which the College handled the protests and pursuant litigation.

“I have not been a happy camper from the beginning,” Peterson said. “I don’t think the College handled it well. The students obviously acted the way they acted based on their perceptions at the time. ... I was not happy with the College basically helping to support the protest, which is how I saw it with them being physically present and printing things. ... Even if you just move it forward from the first court decision had they accepted the first decision, it would’ve been behind us sooner and it would’ve cost the College a lot less.”

Peterson also commented on the tone of the College’s announcement informing the community they would pay the Gibsons.

“Well, they made a point of saying they were disappointed and it’s not gonna affect our endowment and we’re gonna move forward,” Peterson said. “I think they could have said something that might have opened the door to a more positive relationship with Gibson’s. ... I don’t think that addressed town-gown relations at all. I think they did have a sentence saying we hope that we can move forward, but it didn’t say anything that was really inviting to bring people together, in the way I read it.”

President Carmen Twillie Ambar spoke to the Review about the College’s ongoing commitment to town-gown relations, highlighting initiatives such as the Community 101 course for first-years and Taste of Oberlin that were started during her tenure. At the conclusion of the litigation, President Ambar would reiterate her message to students on the quality of their impact on the town.

“We always want to create the positive impact because we are inextricably intertwined — both the College and the city,” she said. “So that’s been my message from the beginning: that we want our students to shop downtown, be engaged downtown, volunteer downtown, be good citizens downtown. And we want our colleagues in the city to recognize and value our students.”

President Ambar also contextualized the many forms of Oberlin’s presence in the community. Highlighting the impact of the College in Northeast Ohio, Columbus, and nationally, President Ambar spoke about students, faculty and staff, and alumni as extensions of Oberlin’s work across various communities.

“When our students are out volunteering in the Oberlin School District, that is Oberlin’s presence,” Ambar said. “When our faculty is engaged in community based research, that’s Oberlin’s presence. When I am out talking to City Council, that’s Oberlin’s presence. When the CFO is on the business partnership, and we rotate going to those various meetings each month or so, that’s Oberlin’s presence. The idea here is that every time Oberlin’s students, faculty and staff, and alumni are out engaged in this work, that is Oberlin’s presence. And so it’s not just the President that does this work of town-gown relationships, it is the entire institution.”

Peterson added that her outlook toward financially supporting the College has changed since the start of the Gibson’s trial. Following Oberlin’s response to incidents at the bakery, Peterson feels she no longer donates as much as she would have under different circumstances.

“When I was a kid, my parents would sit at the table every month and write the bills, and I would say, ‘Why are you giving money to Oberlin College?’” Peterson recalled. “And they said, ‘Because it’s a private college and they count on donations from their alumni, and we are alumni, and we are gonna support the college.’ So I grew up doing that, modestly at the beginning, obviously. And when I got to the point where I could give more, never millions the way some have done and are able to do, I found myself donating significantly less than I would have.”

Now that the active litigation is over, the Gibson family and legal team are grateful that the community can move forward. The Gibsons’ legal team shared the family’s hopes for the continued patronage of Oberlin community members.

“Gibson’s Bakery and the Gibson Family cherish their historic 137 year collegial relationship with the entire Oberlin Community, including its residents, Oberlin College’s students and alumni, and Oberlin College itself,” the Gibsons’ legal team wrote to the Review. “The Gibson Family and Gibson’s Bakery are thankful the litigation is over and that this chapter in Oberlin’s history is behind everyone. We believe our bakery has contributed to the wonderful tapestry of memories of Oberlin for thousands of alumni, residents and visitors to our wonderful city. The Gibsons welcome everyone from the College and town to patronize their store and begin to make new friends and memories which will create tasty smiles forever.”

Oberlin College has made no announcement regarding plans for any future business with Gibson’s Bakery.

Cincinnati Judge Temporarily Blocks Ohio Abortion Ban

Nikki Keating Alexa Stevens News Editors

On Wednesday, Judge Christian A. Jenkins of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas in Cincinnati temporarily blocked the ban placed on abortions after six weeks by Governor Mike DeWine. The ban was passed in April 2019 and went into effect following the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling. Wednesday’s restraining order permits abortions up to the 22nd week of pregnancy, which will remain in effect for at least 14 days. In his ruling, Jenkins referred to the Ohio State Constitution, citing the “health care freedom amendment” passed in 2011, in his ruling.

“No great stretch is required to find that Ohio law recognizes a fundamental right to privacy, procreation, bodily integrity and freedom of choice in health care decision making,” the lower court judge’s ruling reads.

Students are reflecting on this restraining order within the broader context of reproductive rights in the country.

“I think we are at a scary tipping point where these cases are just going to keep going through the courts, and being stalled and then enacted again,” College fourthyear Eli Butler said. “Nothing is going to happen that will be permanent until the federal government makes a decision about it.”

Ohio’s original Senate Bill 23, enacted in 2019, banned abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy — around the time cardiac activity is first detected. But the new ruling invalidates the bill, and in his decision, Jenkins stated that S.B. 23 constitutionally disadvantaged pregnant women.

“S.B. 23 clearly discriminates against pregnant women and places an enormous burden on them to secure safe and effective health care such that it violates Ohio equal protection and benefit clause and is therefore unconstitutional,” Jenkins wrote.

Results from a poll conducted by The Suffolk University/Cincinnati Enquirer in June 2022 showed that 53 perent of respondents wanted protection for abortion rights in Ohio codified into law.

“It’s really interesting to see this happening, as a lot of things are in the news nowadays,” College first-year Mia Elkins said. “I think also coming from [Los Angeles], it’s a really strange thing to see just how completely different two states can be.”

Oberlin students have expressed concern over how abortion restrictions impact people of different socioeconomic backgrounds.

“Abortion access is a class issue,” College first-year Lotus Lloyd said. “You have to, one, [have] the ability to afford good tracking and also be able to tap into fertility awareness strategies, which are not taught to most people. And then to get morning-after pills, to get medical abortion, get surgical abortion, you have to have money to be able to travel … to do these things.”

According to a statistics report by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services from May 2021, Ohio has more than one million children in the child support system, and a study conducted in 2010 showed that 55 percent of all pregnancies in Ohio were unintended.

“I think that it’s definitely not fair that people who are pregnant have to be forced to carry their child to term,” College firstyear Jaena Bethea said. “I think that there are many factors that go into a person’s decision to say that they don’t wanna carry their baby to term. Why are we forcing them to keep their children when they cannot even afford simple things? How are they going to take care of their children? How are they gonna buy diapers? How are they gonna afford hospital bills? How are they gonna afford to feed themselves, to feed their children?”

Ohio has become an epicenter of new abortion laws, specifically after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. There are already multiple reports of individuals with unwanted pregnancies having to cross state lines in order to gain abortion access and care. In recent news, a 10-yearold girl who was six weeks and three days pregnant reportedly had to leave Ohio following S.B. 23’s passage in order to get an abortion, contacting an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist to seek advice and refuge from the ban.

“I just don’t like the fact that as humans, we have to fight for human rights,” College first-year Mia Knox said. “It doesn’t sit right with me that someone else who doesn’t even know me personally feels the right to say what I can do with my body — or any other [person with a uterus], for that matter. I can’t even imagine people who are actually here right now going through unwanted pregnancies or things like sexual assault, and they feel like they’re powerless. It makes me a little angry that we still have to go through this. It feels like there’s always something.”

The Dayton Daily News reports that the Women’s Med Center in Kettering, Ohio, a city only a couple of hours away from Oberlin, saw a surge of patients in their clinic on Thursday, more than 30 of whom sought abortion care and support. Political candidates — particularly Tim Ryan, a prochoice candidate for U.S. Senate — are also increasingly urging their supporters to take to the polls.

“I’m proud to have the support of @ NARAL, and to be an ally in the fight to protect abortion rights and reproductive freedom,” Ryan wrote in a Twitter statement in February. “In the Senate, I’ll keep working to #PassWHPA and codify Roe, and to keep the heavy hand of government out of Ohioans’ health care decisions.”