University of Chicago Law School.

A controversial immigration debate at the University of Chicago Law School this week has been indefinitely postponed by student organizers citing an “unacceptably high risk of serious disturbance.”

The law school's Edmund Burke Society—which bills itself as a “conservative parliamentary debating society”—touched off a campus outcry last week when it invited students to the Feb. 6 debate dubbed “Resolved: Raise the Bar” with a so-called whip sheet that many found offensive. The whip sheet was intended to serve as a call to Edmund Burke Society members to participate in the event.

“Instead of being a porcelain receptacle for other nations' wretched refuse, the United States should again put America first,” the whip sheet reads. Immigration has “diluted national unity” and “crushed domestic wages,” it continues, before offering a counterargument that immigration should be reformed, not restricted.

A group of students responded on the law school's listserv calling the whip sheet racist and raising concerns over the debating society's events, with the backlash generating coverage on Above the Law. A group of students planned to silently protest during the debate, while the school's Law Students Association is planning to hold a town hall to discuss the matter Monday evening.

Shortly after issuing the whip sheet, the Edmund Burke Society issued a statement that the document was intended to “stimulate interest” in its upcoming debates. “To that end, it sets out arguments on both sides of a resolution on which conservatives are likely to disagree among themselves,” the statement said. “In doing so, it often employs hyperbolic language parodying both sides, along with allusions to current events and canonical works of literature.”

But on Saturday evening, society chairman and second-year law student Eric Wessan said the debate would be postponed.

“In light of recent events—in particular, media attention extending beyond the University of Chicago community—the chairman is no longer confident that the event can proceed as planned without an unacceptably high risk of serious disturbance,” he wrote in an email obtained by The Chicago Maroon campus newspaper. Attempts to reach Wessan and other members of the group were not successful.

Law professor Todd Henderson, who was due to deliver pro-immigration comments at the debate, told the Maroon that students may have misunderstood the over-the-top rhetoric that is customary to the whip sheets, which are intended primarily for members of the debate society.

Several law students who opposed the immigration debate issued their own letter over the weekend saying the law school must do more to promote diversity.

“These whip sheets and the gatherings foster a hostile climate for marginalized students at the school,” they wrote.