Nikki Han
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Princeton University faculty can only vote on proposals that are “actionable within the context of university operations,” not those simply expressing political positions or beliefs, after a vote at the faculty meeting on April 28.
Hundreds of faculty members filled the entire lower section of Alexander Hall in Richardson Auditorium for the vote. Ultimately, an overwhelming majority of faculty members supported the passing of the following amendment to Section II.C.2 of the Rules and Procedures of the Faculty, introduced by the Ad-hoc Committee on Faculty-Wide Statements:
In many ways, Marisa Hirschfield ’27 represents the typical high-achieving Princeton student. A history major, Hirschfield writes for the Triangle Club and is interested in filmmaking and public interest law. Like many Princetonians, she identifies as politically progressive.
But where Hirschfield’s resume diverges from many of her classmates is that she serves as a writing fellow for Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS), a nonprofit founded by Stuart Taylor Jr. ’70 and Ed Yingling ’70 that seeks to promote free speech and academic freedom on campus. At Princeton, the free speech issue has been contested for the past several years but mostly involved conservative students who felt that they were being silenced or bullied for their views.
Hope Perry ’24 and Julie Bonette
Princeton Alumni Weekly
Excerpt: The Class of 2025’s Class Day celebration on Monday, May 26, was met with an overwhelmingly positive response even after a movement to condemn the choice of wellness podcaster Jay Shetty ’25 as the keynote speaker.
Students had objected to Shetty because of allegations that he has engaged in plagiarism. The New York Times bestselling author and former monk told members of the class that they should focus on their own purpose and happiness rather than the opinions of others.
Greg Lukianoff
The Atlantic
Excerpt: On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security stripped Harvard University of its Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, instantly jeopardizing the visas of nearly 6,800 international students—27 percent of the student body.
Sarah McLaughlin
FIRE
Excerpt: American universities have long feared that the Chinese government will restrict its country’s students from attending institutions that cross Beijing’s sensitive political lines.
Universities still fear that consequence today, but the most immediate threat is no longer posed by the Chinese government. Now, as the latest punishment meted out to the Trump administration’s preeminent academic scapegoat shows, it’s our own government posing the threat.
Erin Shaw
Heterodox Academy
Excerpt: A win for open inquiry has appeared amidst relentless uncertainty in higher education. The Western Association of Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC), the accreditor of most universities in California and Hawaii, is reconsidering the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) requirements for accreditation in light of the Trump Administration’s executive order on accreditation.
Though the total banning of all things “DEI” represents another political intrusion on academic freedom, dropping DEI as an accreditation requirement allows more space for freedom of thought in higher education as institutions are no longer bound to a particular partisan orthodoxy.
To PFS subscribers, members and friends,
April saw a major campus protest, one that disrupted and cut short an April 7 event featuring former Israeli Prime-Minister Nefthali Bennett. This disruption was by far the worst we have seen on Princeton’s campus. In response,PFS issued two letters to President Eisgruber and the administration. The first letter was sent on April 9 in the immediate aftermath of the event. It makes specific recommendations for swift action to sanction those responsible for breaking university rules. Anticipating a possible recurrence at an April 22 event with Yechiel Leiter, the new Israeli Ambassador to the US, PFS sent the second letter on April 18, outlining measures not taken at the first event, that are critical to preventing more disruption.
To PFS Subscribers, Members and Friends,
On March 10 the Department of Education’s office of Civil Rights sent letters to 60 universities, including Princeton. Theseletters warned of potential “enforcement actions” if institutions do not protect Jewish students.
On March 20, in reaction to the Trump administration’s threat to cut $400 million in Federal funding from Columbia University, 18 law professors with a range of views from liberal to conservative, signed a public letter in The New York Review arguing: “the government may not threaten funding cuts as a tool to pressure recipients into suppressing First Amendment-protected speech.” The next day, Columbia conceded to government demands. Other thanBrown University’s President Christina Paxson, who detailed what Brown would do under similar threats, Princeton’s President Eisgruber was a lone voice amongst the leadership of these universities – in The Cost of Government Attacks on Columbia, published by the Atlantic on March 19.
This week in The Chronicle of Higher Education, three of the 18 public letter signatories, all first amendment scholars, discuss what Columbia and other universities threatened with funding cuts should do. It is worth reading “It is Remarkable How Quickly the Chill Has Descended.” with Michael C. Dorf, of Cornell University; Genevieve Lakier, of the University of Chicago; and Nadine Strossen, of New York Law School.
223 out of 251. A “red light” institution has at least one red light policy that both clearly and substantially restricts freedom of speech.