The University of California (UC) system released a proposal aimed at curbing intolerance on its campuses by possibly infringing on students' right to free speech.

Citing analysis from multiple First Amendment experts, The Huffington Post reported the new policy is not exactly clear about what it wants to ban and it wants to encourage. The legal experts that reviewed the policy and UC's accompanying statement believed the lack of clarity may be the school's real problem.

"The problem is that it's ambiguous," Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor and First Amendment scholar, told The HP. "Reading it, it's hard to figure out what they're attempting to protect and what they're attempting to restrict."

The UC proposal comes shortly after President Obama addressed the matter of free speech on college campuses in Des Moines, Iowa. He said he remembers college as a place that encouraged opposing viewpoints, remarking that he heard things that "infuriated" him, but noted that it only refined his own thoughts and beliefs.

UC stated it would not use its new policy to infringe on students' right to free speech, but the policy indicates they cannot say certain things on campus, The HP noted.

"We define intolerance as unwelcome conduct motivated by discrimination against, or hatred toward, other individuals or groups," UC's proposal reads. "It may take the form of acts of violence or intimidation, threats, harassment, hate speech, derogatory language reflecting stereotypes or prejudice, or inflammatory or derogatory use of culturally recognized symbols of hate, prejudice, or discrimination."

The experts speaking with The HP had doubts about how UC could enact, enforce, or even explain the reasoning behind the policy.

Charles C. Haynes, vice president of the Newseum Institute and Religious Freedom Center: "My question back to them is how can a university uphold free speech by banning free speech?" How is that possible to do?"

Joan Bertin, executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship: "I just don't know how it's going to be implemented. Saying it can't be used for disciplinary measures doesn't mean it can't be used for punishment."