5 days ago
Princeton Fails To Enforce Its Rules on Free Speech, Antisemitism
Princetons President Christopher Eisgruber has positioned himself as perhaps the leading academic defender against the Trump administrations crackdown on universities, citing the importance of universities and academic freedom, as well as his belief that the administration has greatly overreached in its attacks, especially against Harvard.
Yet his ability to lead credibly this defense was challenged in April by an event at Princeton featuring former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who is considered one of the favorites to succeed Benjamin Netanyahu next year. Demonstrators inside McCosh Hall shouted Bennett down and a fire alarm was pulled, apparently by a protester, ending the event. Outside, Jewish attendees were called "inbred swine," among other slurs, and told to "go back to Europe." President Eisgruber apologized to Bennett and university officials promised a serious investigation. A number of observers noted the importance of Princeton enforcing its rules in this situation. I attended the April 7 event, and I volunteered to speak as a witness to university investigators, with whom I met twice for over two hours.
I was therefore shocked when on May 19 I received the results of that investigation in a letter from a university official: No students would be disciplined for their premeditated disruption and blatant antisemitism. As a result, seniors who participated in breaking the rules have now graduated without consequence. Whats more, no meaningful actions would be taken to preclude the same type of disruption and antisemitism from occurring in the future. For all his public statements about how good things are at Princeton, Eisgrubers system failed its first test.
In a written report sent to me and signed by Michele Minter, Vice Provost for Institutional Equity and Diversity, the university admitted that the protestors "created a hostile environment that unreasonably interfered with [my] educational experience [as an attendee] relating to the April 7th event in violation of [Princetons] Policy on Discrimination and/or Harassment." Yet my personal experience is not the real point. The real point is that Princeton allowed a visiting speaker, a high-ranking Jewish leader, to be shut down, and allowed masked protesters to shout antisemitic slurs at Jewish students with complete impunity.
It is most interesting that the report on the investigation was sent to me, and it seems only to me, on May 19, apparently because the university had chosen to treat my letter, with another student, to Eisgruber about the event as a formal "complaint" by me. The report was only made public, barely, on May 21, after I had indicated to officials that I might make it public. Its results were evidently sent to a very few outlets, via email. As far as I can tell, this important report was never formally announced to the public, was not in a press release, and appears nowhere on the Princeton website. It sure looks as though the university is trying to hide its own report.
The university says it cannot punish people who were shouting antisemitic slurs because it cannot identify them since it was dark and they were wearing masks. Yet the university says nothing about implementing a policy banning masks in certain situations, even though I specifically requested it do so and even though many universities are doing so, including the entire University of California system. Princetons report says nothing about implementing meaningful policies that would prevent the same spectacle from occurring in the future. Thus, Princeton is sending a clear signal to those who would violate its rules and the law: Wear a mask and you can abuse Jews on campus. This is absurd.
At the event, protesters were given multiple warnings before they were told to leave, thus enabling the disruptions to last longer. After I raised this issue with officials, they did change that policy to limit the number of warnings, but this was too little too late.
As if all this is not bad enough, the letter from Dean Minter says nothing about prosecuting an outside agitator - a non-student - who separately disrupted the event by shouting awful slurs at the speaker for several minutes. First, he should not have been allowed into the event; it was limited to students. Second, he not only broke Princeton rules, but he also clearly violated New Jersey law relating to a "defiant trespasser." Instead of prosecution, the university said it was declaring him "persona non grata" and banning him from the school for a year. This looks like a joke, but it isnt. This is someone who has nothing to do with Princeton. It is a penalty without meaning.
Amazingly, last week at Princetons reunions, all speaking events were required to have a statement read at the beginning telling the audience that disruptions could be subject to prosecution under a New Jersey law; yet only a few days before, Princeton had indicated that someone who clearly broke that law would not be prosecuted.
Eisgruber pledged after the April 7 event to "pursue disciplinary measures, as appropriate, to the extent any members of the Princeton University community are implicated" and spoke against the "reprehensible and intolerable" antisemitism.I suppose that "as appropriate" is meaningful only insofar as the university can maintain plausible deniability.
Princetons president constantly talks about Princetons free speech rules, and yet when tested, the university will not enforce them. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act requires universities that receive federal funding to provide a learning environment free from racial and ethnic harassment. The Trump administration has already suspended a reported $210 million in grants to Princeton over previous concerns about antisemitism. If Princeton wont take basic steps to protect its students and enforce its rules, the Department of Education must.
Danielle Shapiro recently graduated from Princeton University with a degree in politics. She is a former president of the Princeton Open Campus Coalition, Princeton's sole club committed to the Truth-seeking mission.
