2025 MIT class president banned from graduation ceremony after pro-Palestinian speech
The 2025 class president of MIT was barred from attending her graduation ceremony on Friday after delivering a speech denouncing the war in Gaza at a commencement event the day before.
Megha Vemuri told CNN that after her speech, the university's senior leadership informed her she was not allowed to attend Friday's commencement ceremony and was barred from campus until the event concluded.
Vemuri will still receive her degree, an MIT spokesperson told CNN.
'What I am dealing with right now is absolutely nothing compared to the people of Palestine, and I'd take on much more if it meant helping their cause,' Vemuri told CNN Sunday.
The class president was a scheduled speaker at Thursday's OneMIT Commencement ceremony in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where she took to the podium, a keffiyeh – a symbol of pro-Palestinian solidarity – draped over her graduation robe. She praised her peers for protesting the war in Gaza and criticized the university's ties to Israel.
Tensions over university protests against the war in Gaza have come to a head at this year's graduation ceremonies. New York University recently said it was withholding the diploma of a student who condemned 'genocide' in Gaza while delivering a graduation speech.
Alongside students at NYU, Harvard, Columbia and other universities nationwide, MIT students set up protest encampments last spring to denounce the war in Gaza, facing disciplinary threats from the university.
'You have faced the obstacle of fear before, and you turned it into fuel to stand up for what is right. You showed the world that MIT wants a free Palestine,' Vemuri said Thursday to the audience, with peers, family, university staff and Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey in attendance.
Immediately following Vemuri's speech, MIT President Sally Kornbluth took to the podium and tried to settle the crowd.
'Listen, folks. At MIT, we value freedom of expression, but today's about the graduates,' Kornbluth said.
An MIT spokesperson told CNN the speech Vemuri delivered Thursday 'was not the one that was provided by the speaker in advance.'
'MIT supports free expression but stands by its decision, which was in response to the individual deliberately and repeatedly misleading Commencement organizers and leading a protest from the stage, disrupting an important Institute ceremony,' the spokesperson said in a statement.
The MIT Coalition for Palestine said university chancellor Melissa Nobles sent an email to Vemuri informing her she was not permitted to attend Friday's graduation ceremony and her tickets to the event had been deactivated.
Vemuri says she's grateful for her family, who have been present this week, supporting her. She says she's not disappointed about not getting to walk the stage.
'I see no need for me to walk across the stage of an institution that is complicit in this genocide,' Vemuri said.
'I am, however, disappointed that MIT's officials massively overstepped their roles to punish me without merit or due process, with no indication of any specific policy broken,' she added, calling MIT's purported support of free speech hypocritical.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has condemned the university's decision to ban Vemuri from the ceremony.
'MIT must respect academic freedom and respect the voices of its students, not punish and intimidate those who speak out against genocide and in support of Palestinian humanity,' CAIR-Massachusetts Executive Director Tahirah Amatul-Wadud said in a statement.
In the days after her speech, the young graduate has received nationwide media attention, along with a torrent of ardent support and biting criticism.
'I can handle the attention, positive and negative, if it means spreading that message further,' Vemuri told CNN.
CNN's Dianne Gallagher contributed to this report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cal Poly building vandalized by pro-Palestinian activists; 2 suspects in custody
Cal Poly's Administration Building was vandalized by pro-Palestinian activists Wednesday afternoon. According to an email sent to the Cal Poly campus community from Cal Poly president Jeffrey Armstrong, a group of five individuals entered the university's Financial Aid and Student Accounts office in the Administration Building and spray-painted graffiti on walls, windows, furniture, computers, carpets and floors on Wednesday afternoon. 'Thankfully, no one was physically harmed in the incident, but it was traumatizing for numerous Cal Poly employees and students who were in the office at the time,' Armstrong's statement read. Cal Poly police arrived, causing the five individuals to flee the scene, though two suspects have been identified and are in custody for questioning, Armstrong said. In his statement, Armstrong said there is 'simply zero tolerance' for the individuals' behavior. 'Those participating in violence and criminal activity which endangers other s will be expelled (if they are students), arrested and held fully accountable,' Armstrong's statement read. 'Anyone who views this kind of shortsighted, disgusting and illegal activity as acceptable has no place at Cal Poly and will be rooted out.' Armstrong asked anyone with information related to the incident, including the identities of those responsible, photos, videos or otherwise, to contact the Cal Poly police at 805-756-2281.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Striking images showing environmental destruction aim to ‘inspire action'
Editor's Note: Call to Earth is a CNN editorial series committed to reporting on the environmental challenges facing our planet, together with the solutions. Rolex's Perpetual Planet Initiative has partnered with CNN to drive awareness and education around key sustainability issues and to inspire positive action. Tree-covered mountains rise behind a pile of trash, children run through the orange haze of a dust storm, and a billboard standing on parched earth indicates where the seashore used to be before desertification took hold. These striking images, exhibited as part of the Right Here, Right Now Global Climate Summit, show the devastating effects of climate change. The summit, held at the University of Oxford in the UK and supported by UN Human Rights (OHCHR), aims to reframe climate change as a human rights crisis and spotlight climate solutions. It works with everyone from policymakers to artists to get the message across. 'Photographers document the human rights impacts of climate change, helping to inform the public and hold governments and businesses accountable,' said Volker Türk, UN High Commissioner for the OHCHR, via email. 'The Right Here, Right Now Global Climate Summit shows the power of collective action — uniting storytellers, scientists, indigenous leaders, and others to advance climate solutions rooted in human rights.' Coinciding with World Environment Day on June 5, the exhibition — titled 'Photography 4 Humanity: A Lens on Climate Justice' — features the work of 31 photographers from across the globe, all documenting the effects of global warming and environmental pollution on their own communities. Climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations around the world. Despite emitting far fewer greenhouse gases, low-income nations are suffering the most from extreme weather events and have fewer resources to adapt or recover. Photographs at the exhibition show the effects of desertification, flooding and plastic pollution. A black and white image shows the ruins of a house in West Bengal, India, sloping towards the Ganges River, with the owner sitting alongside. Riverbank erosion is degrading the environment and displacing communities in the area. Photographer Masood Sarwer said in a press release that the photo depicts the 'slow violence' of climate change: 'These are not sudden disasters, but slow-moving, relentless ones — shaping a new category of environmental refugees.' Another photo, taken by Aung Chan Thar, shows children fishing for trash in Inle Lake, Myanmar. The lake was once a pristine natural wonder but now faces the growing threat of plastic pollution. 'This image of children cleaning the water symbolizes the importance of education and collective action in preserving our environment for a sustainable future,' he said. Organizers hope that the exhibition will help to humanize the climate crisis. 'Our mission is to inspire new perspectives through photography,' said Pauline Benthede, global vice president of artistic direction and exhibitions at Fotografiska, the museum of photography, art and culture that is curating the exhibition at the summit. 'It draws attention to the human rights issue at the heart of global warming, which affects both the world's landscapes and the people that live within them.' 'Photography is the most influential and inclusive art form of our times and has the power to foster understanding and inspire action,' she added.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The Trump administration revives an old intimidation tactic: the polygraph machine
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. When President Ronald Reagan's White House threatened thousands of government officials with polygraph exams, supposedly to protect classified data (but probably also to control press leaks), his Secretary of State George Shultz threatened to resign. Reagan's White House backed down and agreed to impose the tests only for those suspected of espionage, according to a 1985 New York Times report. In terms of catching spies, polygraph tests failed spectacularly in key moments. More on that in a moment. First, consider the second Trump administration, which is leaning in on polygraphs, presumably to ferret out leakers, but also as an apparent method of intimidation. 'The polygraph has been weaponized and is being used against individuals who have never had a polygraph requirement, whether pre-employment or security, in their entire federal careers,' said Mark Zaid, an attorney who specializes in representing people who work in national security, after a slew of published reports about polygraph threats throughout the Trump administration. The tests are frequently being used to identify not leaks of classified information but rather 'unclassified conversations regarding policy or embarrassing decisions that have made their way through the rumor mill or directly to the media,' said Zaid, who has previously testified before Congress about the use of polygraphs and sued federal agencies for their practices. ► At the FBI, the New York Times reports, an increased use of polygraphs has 'intensified a culture of intimidation' for agents. ► At the Pentagon, officials publicly threatened to conduct polygraph tests as part of an effort to figure out how the press learned that Elon Musk was scheduled to get a classified briefing about China, which a billionaire with business interests in China probably should not get. It's not clear if polygraph tests were ultimately administered as part of the probe, according to CNN's report. ► At the Department of Homeland Security, according to CNN, polygraph tests have been used on FEMA and FAA officials in addition to those in more traditional national security roles. Administration officials have defended the practice as a way to protect government information. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem defended the use of polygraph tests during an interview on CBS in March. 'The authorities that I have under the Department of Homeland Security are broad and extensive,' she said. Previously, per Zaid, polygraphs have been used as a sort of 'weeding device,' not unlike a physical fitness test for large pools of applicants to national security and law enforcement roles. After that, some employees — particularly in the intelligence community — may be given exams every five or 10 years, sort of like a random drug test. What's happening now is something different. Polygraph tests are 'being used against individuals who have never had a polygraph requirement, whether for pre-employment or security, in their entire federal careers,' Zaid said. Most Americans have never been subjected to a polygraph, and that's in large part because Congress acted to largely outlaw them from use in the public sector in 1988, a time when millions of Americans were being polygraphed each year and companies were using them to bar people from jobs and conduct coercive internal investigations. For an example of why polygraphs were problematic, look back at an old '60 Minutes' segment in which Diane Sawyer submits to an exam and hidden cameras are used to show how the bias of the examiner affects results. 'If you're trying to find one leaker in an organization of 100 people, you could end up falsely accusing dozens of people,' according to Amit Katwala, author of the polygraph history Tremors in the Blood: Murder, Obsession and the Birth of the Lie Detector. 'And you might not even catch the culprit — there's no evidence to suggest that an actual lie detector is even scientifically possible,' he told me in an email. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act was signed into law in 1988 by Reagan, years after his showdown with Shultz. But the law kept polygraphs for the public sector, particularly for national security and law enforcement. In the national security world, the principle of protecting the innocent is 'flipped on its head,' according to Zaid. 'We would rather ruin 99 innocent people's careers than let the one new Ed Snowden, Aldrich Ames or Robert Hanssen get through,' he said. If polygraphs have a spotty record in detecting lies, they have a horrible record in detecting spies. A Senate Intelligence Committee report from 1994 explores how the CIA officer Aldrich Ames, who spied for the KGB, evaded detection for years in part because he passed multiple polygraph exams. At the same time, the same report describes how another CIA employee who aided the KGB, Edward Lee Howard, did so in part because he felt jilted by the CIA after he was fired for failing a polygraph exam. Then there was the shocking trial of FBI official and Russian spy Robert Hanssen, who had never been given a polygraph in his career, there was an uptick in their use at some agencies, including the FBI and the Department of Energy. At the turn of the 21st century, the US government commissioned a large-scale report on the efficacy of the polygraph undertaken by a special committee at the National Research Council. They found the scientific evidence on polygraphs to be more than lacking. 'As a nation, we should not allow ourselves to continue to be blinded by the aura of the polygraph,' Stephen Feinberg, the Carnegie Mellon professor who led the study, testified before Congress. Ames offered his assessment of the polygraph machine in a letter from prison published in 2000, calling the polygraph 'junk science that just won't die' and saying it is most useful as an instrument of coercion. 'It depends upon the overall coerciveness of the setting — you'll be fired, you won't get the job, you'll be prosecuted, you'll go to prison — and the credulous fear the device inspires,' he wrote. Polygraphs are frequently used in criminal investigations, but rarely used in court. The idea behind the polygraph, which was first developed in the '20s, is that lying causes stress. The examiner hooks a person up to monitors that gauge things like blood pressure and fingertip sweat. A pre-interview helps formulate common questions that create a baseline and reactions to more probing questions are compared to that baseline. But it's not a scientific process, and it can be beaten, or misled, since at its core the machine is simply measuring physiological responses. Frequently, incriminating information is offered by nervous exam-takers who don't understand exactly how the process works. Pop culture often suggests that when a person is hooked up to a polygraph machine, their lies will be detected. But that is not exactly true. 'The polygraph works because we think it works. It's a tool of psychological coercion in an already intimidating environment—particularly when it has the weight of the federal government behind it,' Katwala told me. But the intimidation is probably the point. 'Using the polygraph may not help you catch the leakers, but the idea of it could well scare any potential future leakers into keeping their mouths shut,' Katwala said. The man credited with fully developing the polygraph, a Berkeley police officer named John Larson, who also had a PhD in psychology, would later turn on his invention as unreliable, according to Katwala. Larson was inspired by the truth-telling machine of William Marston, himself a psychologist, but one with an active imagination and a flair for the theatrical. Zaid described him as the PT Barnum of polygraphy. Here's a video of Marston using a polygraph-like machine and claiming to identify the varying emotions of blonde, brunette and redheaded women. His conclusion was that redheads like to gamble, brunettes are looking for love and blondes are easiest to scare. Okay. Marston also invented the comic book hero Wonder Woman, with her Lasso of Truth. Katwala warns that there are new technologies being developed with the help of AI or revolving around brain waves, but he argues they should be viewed just with the same skepticism as the polygraph machine. 'None of them get past the Pinocchio's nose problem — everyone's different, and something that works for one person might not work for everyone,' he said. But they could all be used in the same coercive way as the polygraph machine.
