Committee on Academic Freedom – Informed Comment

Protesting MIT’s Disciplining of Grad for pro-Palestine Activism and Advocacy

Committee on Academic Freedom — Wed, 20 Nov 2024 05:06:55 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Sally Kornbluth

President

Dear President Kornbluth and Colleagues:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about the recent disciplinary action by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) against one of its doctoral students, Prahlad Iyengar, for speech activities protected by the university’s own free expression and academic freedom policies, which generally align with the First Amendment. Our concern is further heightened by MIT’s record of sanctioning Iyengar for other pro-Palestine activism since the spring 2024 semester as well as its repression of pro-Palestine speech and assembly on campus since 7 October 2023.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

On 1 November 2024, the MIT administration sent Iyengar a letter informing him that he had been banned from campus and from accessing any building owned or leased by MIT, and prohibited from contacting several members of the MIT community. In taking these measures against Iyengar without affording him due process, the university cited two incidents that it claimed constituted violations of MIT policies. The first involves an email message that Iyengar sent on 24 October 2024 to fellow graduate students working in the lab of MIT Professor Daniela Rus. The message sought to explain the context behind a pro-Palestine protest directed at Professor Rus’s lab two days earlier. In his email, Iyengar described the protest as a response to Professor Rus’s decision to take on “projects sponsored by the Ministry of Defense of Israel,” notwithstanding Israel’s “genocide against Palestinians in Gaza” and other actions in the Middle East. In his message Iyengar made clear that he did not intend to “shame or intimidate” the email’s recipients, but rather wanted to “offer support” and a “safe space” for those students who wanted “to brainstorm ways” to address “the pressing issue[s]” created by Professor Rus’s work. While MIT asserts that this email message violated its harassment policy, it is hard to see how it can be reasonably characterized as intimidating, hostile or abusive to anyone. The fact that Mr. Iyengar sent just one email message offers further evidence that his action can be deemed neither “severe” nor “pervasive,” as is required by the university’s definition of “harassment.”

The second incident which MIT has cited to justify its sanctioning of Iyengar involves an article that he wrote and published in the MIT-recognized student zine Written Revolution. The article, titled “On Pacifism,” is an extended scholarly discussion of the place of pacifism in pro-Palestine activism. While MIT claims that the article “could be interpreted as a call for more violent or destructive forms of protest at MIT,” Iyengar neither calls for violence nor suggests that students at MIT engage in violent activity. MIT has also expressed concerns about the article’s “inclusion of symbolism from a U.S.-designated terrorist organization containing violent imagery,” referring to two images (out of four in the article) that feature the emblem of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a U.S.-government designated terrorist organization. MIT has not explained how the inclusion of such images violates relevant MIT policy by threatening or endangering any person on campus, as the policy specifies; nor does the article’s content provide any objective basis for concluding that any person could be threatened, intimated or coerced by it.

Notwithstanding MIT’s suggestions to the contrary, Iyengar’s email message and article – indisputably forms of expressive activity – fall squarely within his right to free expression and academic freedom, as articulated by MIT’s own policies and rules. For example, in its Statement on Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom the university proudly affirms that, “with a tradition of celebrating provocative thinking, controversial views, and nonconformity, MIT unequivocally endorses the principles of freedom of expression and academic freedom.” The statement goes on to note that “[f]ree expression promotes creativity by affirming the ability to exchange ideas without constraints” and that it is “enhanced by the doctrine of academic freedom, which protects both intramural and extramural expression without institutional censorship or discipline.” MIT’s Values Statement reiterates these principles, proclaiming that “because learning is nourished by a diversity of views, we cherish free expression, debate, and dialogue in pursuit of truth….”

While some members of the MIT community may have been offended or distressed by Iyengar’s email message and article, according to the university’s own policies those feelings cannot be used to deprive Iyengar of his right to express his opinions on matters of public and scholarly concern. Indeed, MIT’s Hand and Mind Book notes that “in an academic community, the free and open exchange of ideas and viewpoints reflected in the concept of academic freedom may sometimes prove disturbing or offensive to some,” but “[t]he examination and challenging of assumptions, beliefs or opinions is…[nevertheless] intrinsic to the rigorous education that MIT strives to provide.”

We note that this is not the first time that MIT has sought to curtail Iyengar’s free expression on matters related to Palestine. Since the spring 2024 semester, MIT has subjected him to various instances of harassment and punishment for expressing a pro-Palestine viewpoint, including subjecting him to disciplinary measures for conducting a peaceful exchange with representatives of weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin at an on-campus career fair earlier this semester.

More broadly, we are concerned that MIT’s actions against Iyengar are only one of many repressive measures taken by the university against pro-Palestinian advocacy since 7 October 2023. These measures include MIT’s decision to interim suspend pro-Palestine student protestors and bar them from campus in May 2024 without due process, including prohibiting them from accessing student housing and receiving monthly graduate worker stipends; the administration’s general pursuit of aggressive investigations, interrogations and other disciplinary actions against pro-Palestine students over the past year; and its decision to suspend the main pro-Palestine student organization at MIT, the Coalition Against Apartheid (CAA), and the revocation of CAA’s web domain. These actions have led both students and faculty at MIT to conclude that the university is systematically singling out pro-Palestine viewpoints for repression and sanction.

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) has recently called attention to the alarming expansion of restrictive policies that intimidate and silence faculty and students, especially those voicing their principled opposition to Israel’s genocidal assault on the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank. As the AAUP puts it, “[a]dministrators who claim that ‘expressive activity’ policies protect academic freedom and student learning, even as they severely restrict its exercise, risk destroying the very freedoms of speech and expression they claim to protect.”

The systematic repression of pro-Palestine voices, which has become an undeniable reality across U.S. colleges and universities since 7 October 2023, has severely undermined the integrity, autonomy and mission of this country’s institutions of higher education. Instead of following other universities down this dangerous road, we urge MIT to change course and adhere to its avowed values. In this regard, we reiterate the call made by members of its faculty earlier this year “for MIT to take a leadership role in defending freedom of speech and academic freedom, and . . . engage in constructive efforts to respond to those who are peacefully expressing moral distress in the face of an ethical and humanitarian crisis and in support for life.”

We therefore call on MIT to cease its targeting of Prahlad Iyengar, rescind all outstanding disciplinary sanctions, charges and proceedings against him, and end the university’s ban on Written Revolution’s distribution of the volume in which his article appeared. More broadly, we urge MIT to adhere to its own policies on freedom of expression and academic freedom, and refrain from selectively and disproportionately enforcing its rules against pro-Palestine activism and advocacy.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting Flawed Disciplinary Process toward Student Protesters at Swarthmore

Committee on Academic Freedom — Sun, 10 Nov 2024 05:02:05 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Valerie Smith

President

Swarthmore College

president@swarthmore.edu

Dear President Smith and colleagues:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our concern about the flawed disciplinary proceedings involving a number of its students that Swarthmore College is currently conducting. We regard these proceedings, along with some of the college’s policies and recent actions, as posing a threat to the ability of its students and faculty to exercise their academic freedom and freedom of speech and assembly, thereby calling into question Swarthmore’s avowed commitment to upholding these rights.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

In May 2024, 25 students at Swarthmore College who had engaged in activism in support of Palestinian rights and opposition to Israeli and US policies toward the Palestinians during the 2023-2024 academic year were formally issued letters outlining charges against them; they are currently undergoing disciplinary proceedings. These letters alleged various violations of student conduct policies outlined in the Swarthmore Student Handbook, which differentiates between minor and major forms of misconduct. The character, conduct and context of these disciplinary proceedings raise serious concerns about due process and selective enforcement.

We find it distressing that Swarthmore chose to outsource, to a private law firm, the investigation of the alleged violations, the authoring of charge letters and the determination of what evidence accused students are allowed to access, with no clear or consistent standard across cases. This decision creates a significant risk that the personnel involved will lack adequate knowledge of Swarthmore College’s policies and practices, and that they will not be respectful of due process or of students’ right to freedom of expression and to privacy. For example, we note that, in the case of at least one student, the initial charge letter included the following alleged violations of the Student Handbook: “assault,” “harassment based on a protected class,” and “hate crime.” The “hate crime” charge was subsequently dropped because there is in fact no such category of misconduct specified in the Handbook. These issues call into question the fairness of the disciplinary proceedings and are likely to result in deviations from Swarthmore’s established disciplinary procedures.

Swarthmore has also denied accused students’ requests to have legal representation at disciplinary proceedings, though this is accepted practice at many other colleges and universities. The college has, in addition, allowed the attorney from the external law firm who conducted the investigation and authored the charge letters to participate in the hearings, ostensibly as a witness, which we regard as a gross violation of due process. To make matters worse, reports indicate that Swarthmore has actively encouraged students to initiate criminal or civil proceedings against anyone they believe has committed acts of harassment or assault, if the college has found them guilty of a disciplinary infraction.

The disciplinary proceedings against these 25 students also appear to exemplify selective enforcement. Many of the actions that are being framed as violations of college policy are in fact regular features of the tradition of student activism that Swarthmore College claims to celebrate. We note that students who engaged in protest activity related to sexual harassment and assault, climate change and Black Lives Matter have faced far fewer charges in both number and severity, despite deploying more or less identical methods of protest. At the same time, most of the alleged minor misconduct charges against the 25 students involve posting fliers, putting up posters and chalking political messages in “undesignated areas.” Yet Swarthmore students have been doing the same things regarding other issues for years and continue to do so today, without facing investigation or disciplinary action. This disparity suggests that what is at issue is not the time, place and manner of the actions in which the 25 students are alleged to have engaged but the political perspective they were expressing.

Such content-based discrimination also seems to have informed the Swarthmore administration’s interactions with faculty members on several occasions. We note that last spring the college’s Board of Management invited several faculty members to a discussion, ostensibly about pedagogy. During the meeting board members questioned individual faculty members about their decision to sign a petition supporting the rights of students critical of Israeli and US policies to hold an encampment. We also note that over the past summer the Swarthmore Bias Incident Response Team (BIRT) sent emails to several faculty members warning them that their decision to follow a satirical Instagram account made some students feel unwelcome in their classrooms. These actions threaten the academic freedom and free speech rights of faculty and are likely to have a chilling effect on their ability to express and share their views on matters of public concern.

This country’s institutions of higher education should be places in which all members of the campus community can express their views and seek knowledge freely. In these fraught times college and university leaders have a heightened responsibility to protect the freedom of speech and academic freedom of all members of the campus community. This is all the more important now, when violence is raging in the Middle East, our own government is so deeply involved in what is happening, and various individuals and organizations with a political agenda are seeking to vilify and silence students with whom they disagree.

We therefore call on Swarthmore College to ensure that the investigation and adjudication of disciplinary charges against these 25 students be conducted in a fair and transparent manner, in full conformity with the right to due process. We also call on Swarthmore College to refrain from selective and disproportionate disciplinary measures against students, faculty and staff who are exercising their right to freedom of speech and assembly, and their academic freedom, including by expressing their support for Palestinian rights and for changes in Israel, US and college policies. More broadly, Swarthmore must refrain from adopting any policy, or taking any measure, which is likely to exert a further chilling effect on teaching, learning and freedom of expression on campus. Finally, we urge Swarthmore College to publicly and forcefully reaffirm its commitment to protecting the free speech rights and academic freedom, as well as the safety and well-being, of all members of the campus community.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Taking Issue with Suspension of Harvard Library Access for Students and Faculty staging “Read-In” to Protest Gaza War

Committee on Academic Freedom — Thu, 07 Nov 2024 05:02:59 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | – Middle East Studies Association

Alan M. Garber

President, Harvard University

alan_garber@harvard.edu . . .

Dear President Garber, Provost Manning, and Vice President for the Harvard Library and University Librarian Whitehead:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our concern about Harvard University’s decision to ban a number of undergraduate students, law students and faculty from entering Harvard University’s libraries. We regard this action as a violation of the principles of academic freedom and of freedom of expression, in contravention of the essential role that this country’s colleges and universities play as incubators of democratic ideals and sites for open political expression and debate.

On 21 September 2024 a group of undergraduate students spent time silently studying in Widener Library while wearing kufiyas, a traditional Palestinian scarf, and displaying signs on their personal computers protesting Israel’s wars on Gaza and Lebanon. At least twelve of the students were subsequently banned from the library for a period of two weeks. On 25 October 2024 some twenty-five members of Harvard’s faculty were banned from entering the same library after they conducted a silent “study-in” that involved placing signs supporting the right to free speech on the tables in front of them or attached to their computers. Finally, Harvard Law School students were banned from the Langdell Law Library for engaging in a similar action. We emphasize that all the students and faculty involved were seated in the library, reading and working silently.

The University Librarian has claimed that these students and faculty members were in violation of university policy because their actions were a form of protest, had the potential to make other students uncomfortable and manifested attention-seeking behavior. We note, however, that university policy does not prohibit either the wearing of culturally specific items of clothing in libraries or the expression of political viewpoints by means of signs displayed on individuals’ personal property. Moreover, the allegation concerning “attention-seeking behavior” is so vague and arbitrary that it could be used to justify the suppression of any form of expression, political or otherwise. We note the statement issued on behalf of all six co-presidents of Harvard’s own Council on Academic Freedom, which pointed out that “the students who sat quietly and studied did not interfere with normal campus activity, and Harvard thus has no compelling reason to prohibit their speech. Indeed, our commitment to free expression requires us to allow it.”

In these fraught times, college and university leaders have a heightened responsibility to protect the freedom of speech and academic freedom of all members of their communities. This country’s institutions of higher education should be places in which a broad range of perspectives can be expressed, debated and criticized without fear of defamation, harassment or termination. As MESA’s Board of Directors put it in a statement dated 18 December 2023: “We call on university leaders and administrations to affirmatively assert and protect the rights to academic freedom and freedom of speech on their campuses. We reaffirm that there can be no compromise of the right and ability of students, faculty, and staff at universities across North America (and elsewhere) to express their viewpoints free of harassment, intimidation, and threats to their livelihoods and safety.”

We therefore call on Harvard’s administration to immediately rescind the bans imposed on entry to its libraries and to apologize to all those who were subjected to a ban. We further call on Harvard to publicly reaffirm, and act in accordance with, its avowed commitment to respect for “freedom of speech and academic freedom,” as set forth in the University-Wide Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, in a transparent and content-neutral manner.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting U of Minnesota Barring Students from Campus for Protesting Gaza War

Committee on Academic Freedom — Wed, 06 Nov 2024 05:02:51 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Rebecca M. Cunningham
President, University of Minnesota
upres@umn.edu . . .

Dear President Cunningham and Colleagues:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our concern about the decision of the administration of the University of Minnesota (UMN) to indefinitely suspend eight students who participated in an occupation of a university building, Morrill Hall, on 21 October 2024. Whatever one thinks of the students’ action, we regard the university’s decision to bar them from classes, dormitories, dining halls and campus jobs as an unduly harsh sanction that violates their rights to education and sustenance. The fact that this sanction was imposed without the students having had the opportunity to defend their actions in a properly conducted disciplinary process makes it all the more egregious. The university’s actions in this regard seem aimed at deterring students from exercising the dictates of their conscience on matters of urgent public concern. They also contravene the University of Minnesota’s laudable tradition of countenancing contentious student protests.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

On 21 October 2024, some members of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), part of the UMN Divest Coalition, held a rally to protest UMN’s recently revised student conduct policy and the Board of Regents’ rejection of requests to divest from Israel-related investments. Divestment had been the subject of ongoing discussions between university leaders and UMN Divest since the dismantling of the spring 2024 protest encampments. Some students and alumni then marched to Morrill Hall, a main administrative building, and barricaded themselves inside, using patio furniture and other items. Protesters declared the building “Halimy Hall,” in commemoration of 19-year-old Medo Halimy, a university student in Gaza who documented daily life in wartime and was killed by an Israeli airstrike in Khan Yunis in August 2024.

According to a 22 October 2024 statement from the Office of the President, the students spray-painted over internal security cameras and damaged other property. The statement asserts that employees in Morrill Hall were unable to exit the building due to protesters preventing their free movement and exit. “These actions crossed the line into illegal activity,” the statement asserts, and on that basis the University of Minnesota Police Department entered Morrill Hall two hours into the occupation, along with Hennepin County police officers, arrested eight students and three alumni. We note, however, that video evidence seems to show students encouraging staff who wished to leave to do so after announcing their occupation and offering escorts to an available exit. Those arrested were released without charge from Hennepin County Jail on 24 October 2024.

The university has issued indefinite interim suspension orders for the eight students, on the premise that they pose an ongoing threat to the university. The orders bar them from attending classes, living in dormitories, eating in dining halls or participating in their campus jobs and activities. Students also face two sets of disciplinary hearings, to which they are permitted to bring lawyers: a first hearing concerning the interim suspension and a second concerning the conduct charges.

We regard the barring of the students from all university activities, before any transparent investigation or disciplinary hearing has been conducted, to be an unduly draconian sanction that contravenes the university’s obligation to educate and to foster debate, however heated. The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) has recently called attention to the alarming expansion of restrictive policies that intimidate and silence faculty and students, especially those voicing their principled opposition to Israel’s genocidal assault on the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank. As the AAUP put it, “Administrators who claim that ‘expressive activity’ policies protect academic freedom and student learning, even as they severely restrict its exercise, risk destroying the very freedoms of speech and expression they claim to protect.”

The University of Minnesota’s recently issued protest guidelines state that “engagement that is inconsistent with University policies becomes civil disobedience.” We remind you of the generative role of civil disobedience in the university’s own history. For example, in January 1969 African American students occupied Morrill Hall to protest discrimination and racism, an event documented by the University Archives. Their action led to the founding of the African American and African Studies Department later that year.

Students engaged in conscientious political action who are willing to accept the consequences of their actions ought not to be prevented from continuing their education. We therefore call on you to rescind the indefinite suspension orders imposed on the eight students and to ensure that any disciplinary process to which they are subjected is conducted in a fair and transparent manner and in accordance with generally accepted standards.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli
MESA President
Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting Wake Forest University’s Cancellation of a Lecture by Professor Rabab Abdelhadi

Committee on Academic Freedom — Wed, 02 Oct 2024 04:02:25 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Dear President Wente and Provost Gillespie:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our concern about Wake Forest University’s decision to cancel a scheduled lecture by Professor Rabab Abdelhadi, who is currently director of San Francisco State University’s Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Initiative. We regard Wake Forest’s action as a severe violation of the principles of academic freedom.

According to media reports, Professor Abdelhadi was scheduled to speak on 7 October 2024 at an event sponsored by five academic units at Wake Forest. After the event was announced, a number of campus organizations launched an online petition drive demanding that the university cancel it. Apparently bowing to pressure, the university cancelled the event. In an email message to the campus community announcing the decision, the two of you stated: “We have also made the conscious decision not to host events on this day that are inherently contentious and stand to stoke division in our campus community. We are living in complex times, and yet we remain hopeful about the future because of this caring community and our shared mission to serve humanity.”

Exercising caution about contention and “stoking division” may be a laudable goal, but for Wake Forest to cancel an academic event because some people object to an invited speaker’s perspective on an issue of public interest betrays the university’s avowed commitment to academic freedom and to the free and open exchange of ideas, principles which are fundamental to the integrity and mission of our institutions of higher education. Moreover, the contention and “division” which you seek to avoid – when thought of as healthy disagreement and debate among scholars and students – is a laudable goal in and of itself for a college or university. Whether or not everyone at Wake Forest agrees with Professor Abdelhadi’s opinions regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, silencing her cannot be acceptable at an institution which claims to uphold academic freedom and freedom of speech.

In these fraught times, college and university leaders have a heightened responsibility to protect the freedom of speech and academic freedom of all members of their communities – and their invited guests. This country’s institutions of higher education should be places in which a broad range of perspectives can be expressed, debated and criticized without fear of defamation, harassment or termination. As MESA’s Board of Directors put it in a statement dated 18 December 2023: “We call on university leaders and administrations to affirmatively assert and protect the rights to academic freedom and freedom of speech on their campuses. We reaffirm that there can be no compromise of the right and ability of students, faculty, and staff at universities across North America (and elsewhere) to express their viewpoints free of harassment, intimidation, and threats to their livelihoods and safety.”

We therefore call on you to immediately reverse the decision to cancel Professor Abdelhadi’s lecture at Wake Forest. We further call on you to vigorously reaffirm your commitment to uphold academic freedom and freedom of speech at Wake Forest and to actively foster an atmosphere of free academic inquiry and discussion, including the unhindered right of faculty and invited guests of the campus community to express their political opinions in the public realm.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting Cornell University’s Suspension and threatened Deportation of graduate Student Momodou Taal for Protest

Committee on Academic Freedom — Tue, 01 Oct 2024 04:06:51 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Dear Interim President Kotlikoff, Provost Bala, Dr. Lombardi and Ms. Liang:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our extreme concern about your decision to temporarily suspend Cornell graduate student Momodou Taal, without proper due process, on the grounds of his alleged disruptive participation in a pro-Palestine campus protest. We are particularly concerned that, as a result of this callous and arbitrary decision, Mr. Taal, an international student attending Cornell on an F-1 visa, is facing immediate deportation, without adequate opportunity to defend himself against these allegations.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

Mr. Taal, who is an instructor at Cornell University as well as a graduate student, has been a vocal advocate for Palestinian rights. On 18 September 2024, along with approximately 100 other students, he participated in, and gave a short speech at, a demonstration outside of a career fair held at the university’s Statler Hotel. The demonstrators were protesting the presence on campus of defense contractors Boeing and L3Harris, whom they regarded as complicit in Israeli war crimes against the Palestinian population of Gaza. Video evidence from the protest shows that some students pushed through a police line to enter the job fair site, with others following. However, the footage also appears to show that Mr. Taal did not come into direct contact with the police line and entered the grounds only after access had been achieved by other students. Once inside, the students conducted a nonviolent demonstration which disrupted the job fair through chants and drumming, resulting in the fair being shut down. It is important to note that, according to his account, Mr. Taal was present in the hotel lobby for only a few minutes and left the protest early; we understand that he does not appear in any of the video footage documenting the protest inside the hotel.

On 23 September 2024 Interim President Michael I. Kotlikoff issued a statement condemning the student protestors for what he described as “highly disruptive and intentionally menacing behavior.” He claimed that demonstrators had violated university rules by pushing aside Cornell Police officers, forcibly entering the career fair site, creating excessive noise and disrupting display tables. He warned that the students involved would face immediate suspension or employment sanctions. However, of all the students who participated in the demonstration, Mr. Taal was reportedly the only one to receive a message directing him to report to Cornell’s Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards. On the same day that the Interim President made his statement, Mr. Taal was informed of his temporary suspension, given a physical copy of a no-trespass order barring him from campus, and notified that his F-1 visa would be terminated. It is our understanding that he was not fully informed of the specific allegations against him or given a reasonable opportunity to respond to them.

Mr. Taal appealed his suspension on 25 September 2024. One day later that appeal was rejected by Dr. Ryan Lombardi, Vice President of Student and Campus Life. We are deeply concerned about the apparent lack of a properly conducted formal investigation into the allegations against Mr. Taal, the denial of an adequate opportunity for him to respond to the allegations against him, Cornell’s failure to hold a disciplinary hearing before a full review panel and violations of Mr. Taal’s procedural rights under Cornell’s own policies. On 27 September 2024 Mr. Taal submitted a second, and as we understand it final, appeal to the Provost’s Office and is currently awaiting a response. We note that this is not the first time Mr. Taal has been specifically targeted for his pro-Palestinian activities: in April 2024 he was one of just four students threatened with suspension over involvement in a pro-Palestine encampment that involved hundreds of participants.

We believe that there is good reason to conclude that Cornell University, by ignoring due process and arbitrarily suspending Mr. Taal, has violated its own Student Code of Conduct Procedures. Moreover, the university administration must have been aware that his suspension would result in the termination of his F-1 visa, subjecting him to deportation. We believe that the use of suspension resulting in deportation sets an extremely dangerous precedent and threatens the free speech rights and the academic freedom of Cornell’s students, faculty and staff. We also note that, as a member of Cornell Graduate Students United-UE, Mr. Taal is entitled to union representation in disciplinary matters, as outlined in the union’s Memorandum of Agreement with the university. Given that the union has asserted its right to bargain over the disciplining of Mr. Taal, your administration’s unilateral actions appear to violate this agreement.

Mr. Taal is a promising graduate student with an outstanding academic record. As a Black Muslim international student, he is among the most vulnerable members of Cornell’s student body and deserves, at a minimum, the same level of procedural protection and consideration that Cornell’s policies are supposed to afford to all its students. The university’s actions are an affront to its stated commitment to diversity and inclusion and to its Core Values, which emphasize “free and open inquiry and expression—tenets that underlie academic freedom—even of ideas some may consider wrong or offensive.” Moreover, by taking discriminatory disciplinary action against a marginalized student, without due process, the university’s actions are also likely to have a chilling effect on other members of the campus community – especially other racialized and international students – thereby undermining their ability to exercise their First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly and their academic freedom. In this context we call your attention to the statement issued by MESA’s board of directors and its Committee on Academic Freedom on 6 May 2024 which denounced actions by university leaders that delegitimize and repress campus advocacy opposing Israel’s war in Gaza.

We therefore join the Cornell chapter of the American Association of University Professors and the Cornell Graduate Student Union as well as many members of the Cornell community and the public in calling on you to immediately rescind the temporary suspension of Mr. Taal. We further urge Cornell University to refrain from arbitrary and draconian disciplinary measures against students, faculty and staff exercising their right to freedom of speech and assembly, and their academic freedom, including by expressing their views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting the Firing of Tenured Professor Maura Finkelstein for Criticizing Zionism

Committee on Academic Freedom — Sat, 28 Sep 2024 04:06:44 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Dear President Harring, Provost Furge and Professor Dowd:

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about the announcement by Muhlenberg College that it intends to terminate Dr. Maura Finkelstein, a tenured member of the college’s faculty, because of an Instagram post that she had reposted. Even if some people may find the post objectionable, we believe that Professor Finkelstein’s reposting is protected by the First Amendment and by the principles of academic freedom. It cannot reasonably be construed as a violation of Muhlenberg College’s equal opportunity and nondiscrimination policy or justify her termination.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

Dr. Finkelstein is a cultural anthropologist whose research has addressed multiple geographies and theoretical realms. Her first book, The Archive of Loss: Lively Ruination in Mill Land Mumbai, charted the experiences of textile mill workers in the city of Mumbai. She is currently at work on a second book about equine-assisted therapy. Her scholarship and pedagogy have also engaged a range of issues relating to Palestine/Israel; her teaching includes a course on Palestine and she has published peer-reviewed work on her experiences teaching this material.

In the aftermath of the 7 October 2023 assault on Israel, Professor Finkelstein was subjected to intense attacks as a result of the criticism of Israel and of Zionism that she expressed in published work, academic forums and social media posts. Among other things, a number of donors to and alumni of Muhlenberg College circulated a petition demanding her removal from her tenured position. In January 2024 Professor Finkelstein was placed on administrative leave after reposting someone else’s Instagram post which was critical of Zionism and Zionists. The Muhlenberg College administration subsequently claimed that Professor Finkelstein’s reposting had violated its equal opportunity and nondiscrimination policy.

An outside firm hired by the college to investigate the case determined that Professor Finkelstein’s Instagram post had not constituted a violation of college policy. However, an ad hoc committee appointed by Muhlenberg’s Title IX office subsequently reversed this determination, without specifying the grounds for its decision. In late May 2024 Professor Finkelstein was informed that the college intended to terminate her for cause, because her Instagram post allegedly “met the standard for online discrimination and harassment involving hateful speech. It was severe and objectively offensive, and it denies or limits the ability to participate in the College’s programs.” She has appealed and is awaiting the decision of the college’s Faculty, Personnel and Policies Committee.

We note that Muhlenberg College has declared that it “endorses the robust, stimulating and thought-provoking exchange of ideas, which requires in-depth and complex educational experiences as well as the space for divergent perspectives.” We further note that neither college policy nor federal law defines those who adhere to or advocate for particular political ideologies (such as Zionism) as members of legally protected classes. As we have pointed out elsewhere, critiques of Israeli policies or of Zionism must not be conflated with antisemitism, nor should expressions of political opinion be sanctioned.

We therefore call on you to immediately reverse the decision to terminate Professor Finkelstein and to publicly declare her exonerated of the charges brought against her. We further call on you to vigorously reaffirm your commitment to uphold academic freedom and freedom of speech at Muhlenberg and to actively foster an atmosphere of free academic inquiry and discussion, including the unhindered right of faculty and other members of the campus community to express their political opinions in the public realm.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli
MESA President
Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Protesting Israel’s targeted destruction of all Schools and Universities in Gaza

Committee on Academic Freedom — Sat, 14 Sep 2024 04:06:23 +0000

Middle East Studies Association Board | Committee on Academic Freedom | –

Dear President Biden, Vice-President Harris, Secretary of State Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Austin,

We write to you on behalf of the Committee on Academic Freedom (CAF) and the Board of Directors of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) to vehemently condemn the government of Israel’s brutal and cruel military campaign against the Palestinian people of Gaza and beseech you to urgently insist upon its immediate cessation. According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health – Gaza, the death toll of Gazan Palestinians from Israeli attacks from 7 October 2023 until 9 September 2024 reached a shocking 40,972, with at least 94,761 wounded and untold numbers of dead who remain beneath the rubble. In this letter, as in our last two letters to Israeli government officials (25 January 2024; 21 November 2023), we focus on the decimation of the education sector in the Gaza Strip through the military’s killing of students, faculty, and staff and its targeted destruction of schools, university buildings, and related facilities. We are especially concerned to underscore the magnitude of the decimation by identifying by name and affiliation as many of the murdered Gazan scholars as is possible at this time.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, MESA publishes the International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and elsewhere.

Over the past 11 months, the unprecedented extent of death and destruction wrought by Israel’s war on Gaza has devastated the educational sector. According to the United Nations (UN) Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), more than 625,000 students—90,000 of whom are university students—and close to 23,000 teachers have been impacted by attacks on educational facilities and school closures. All remain without access to formal education or even a safe place to shelter.

According to the UN in conjunction with the Ministry of Health, as of 8 September 2024, more than 10,000 students and 411 educational staff have been killed, while more than 15,394 students and 2,411 teachers have been injured since 7 October (OCHA, Humanitarian Situation Update #215, Gaza Strip, 9 September 2024). Moreover, 90 percent of school buildings have been damaged, and 85 percent of educational facilities are “out of service due to direct and deliberate targeting” (OCHA, Gaza Humanitarian Response Update, 22 July–4 August 2024). Within the first 100 days of the onslaught, all major universities were destroyed [see our letter 25 January 2024]. To date, numerous colleges and technical institutes have been severely damaged, if not destroyed. The physical infrastructure necessary for higher education—including laboratories, libraries, classrooms, the latest technologies, etc.—no longer exists. Furthermore, in the absence of (reliable) electricity, internet connectivity and even phone reception, even remote instruction is extremely challenging, if not practically impossible.

As for primary and secondary education, 191 schools, including those run by UNRWA, have been bombed or vandalized. UNRWA, for one, has reported that no official schooling is available at any of its 200 schools. While 119 government schools have been heavily damaged, more than 62 have been completely destroyed. Many schools that have served to shelter internally displaced Palestinians, either because of the destruction of their homes or because of (repeated) evacuation orders, are among those facilities that have been destroyed, if not severely damaged, leading to the deaths of many of those taking shelter. Recent examples include: incidents on 6 and 7 September, when a tent housing internally displaced persons in Halima Al Sadia School in Jabalya Camp and a prayer hall inside Amr Ibn Al Aas school in Gaza city were hit; the targeting of a school in Deir el-Balah on 20 August, a school in Gaza City on 10 August (OCHA Humanitarian Situation Update #203, 12 Aug 2024) and two on 8 August (OCHA Humanitarian Situation Update #202, 9 August 2024), causing tremendous loss of life. Just the week before, four schools serving as shelters were attacked. Indeed, according to an assessment conducted by UNICEF, OCHA and Save the Children, 53% of schools used as shelters — amounting to some 190 — have been directly and deliberately hit by Israel’s military in the last 11 months.

In addition to the massive destruction of Gaza’s physical educational infrastructure — the rebuilding of which will require many years and billions of dollars — the systematic killing of our Palestinian colleagues in Gaza needs to be highlighted. Scholars from across the humanities, social sciences, and STEM fields, widely respected by their peers and students, have been targeted and murdered. These academics represented the intellectual leadership of the Palestinian community in Gaza and were the foundation for the accumulation and dissemination of knowledge.

Various organizations have been documenting the Israeli military’s killing of Palestinian scholars and university professors. As a precise accounting is obstructed by the ongoing attacks and insecurity, we provide below only a partial list of the names and, where possible, academic affiliations of those scholars who have been killed. These individuals represent a very small percentage of those who have been integral to higher education and intellectual life in the Gaza Strip and have been catastrophically affected by death and suffering: the hundreds of faculty and staff and thousands of students and their families who have been killed in military assaults, bombings, or through prolonged exposure to starvation and disease since 7 October 2023.

University Presidents:
Professor Sufyan Tayeh, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Said Al-Zibda, University College of Applied Sciences
Professor Muhammad Eid Shabir, former President, Islamic University of Gaza

Deans:
Dean Ibrahim al-Astal, Islamic University of Gaza
Dean Khitam Al-Wasifi, Islamic University of Gaza
Dean Mahmoud Abu Daf, Islamic University of Gaza
Dean Omar Farwanah, Faculty of Medicine, Islamic University of Gaza
Dean Taysir Ibrahim, Faculty of Shari’a and Law, Islamic University of Gaza
Dean Nasser Abu Al-Nour, Faculty of Nursing, Islamic University of Gaza
Dean Ahmed Abu Absa, University of Palestine
Dean Ahmed Al-Dalu, University of Palestine
Dean Naim Baroud, Faculty of Arts, Islamic University of Gaza

Professors and academic staff (listed in groups by institutional affiliation):
Professor Adham Hassouna, Al-Aqsa University
Professor Ahmad Mahmoud al-Qara, Al-Aqsa University
Professor Nesma Abu Shaqra, Al-Aqsa University
Professor Abdel-Nasir Al-Saqqa, Al-Aqsa University
Professor Nidal Qaddura, Al-Aqsa University
Professor Wiesam Essa, Al-Aqsa University
Professor Fadil Abu Hain, Al-Aqsa University
Dr. Mohamad Hammad, lecturer in Business, Al-Aqsa University
Yahya Ghabban, lecturer, Faculty of Arts, Al-Aqsa University

Professor Jihad Al-Masri, Al-Quds Open University
Professor Hassan Kafarneh, Al-Quds Open University
Professor Muhammed Atef Awad, Al-Quds Open University
Professor Muhammad Al-Nabahin, Al-Quds Open University

Professor Ibrahim Barhoum Abu Salah, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Prof Mohammad Bakheit, Islamic University of Gaza
Islam Suleiman Haboush, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Midhat Saidem, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Nahed Al-Rafati, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Refaat AlAreer, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Mohammed Awad, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Rizq Arruq, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Azzu Affanah, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Education, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Muhammad Bakhit, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Salem Abu-Mukhdah, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Muhammad Dabbour Assad, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Nasir Al-Yafawi, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Sharif Al-Assali, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Youssef al-Kahlout, Arabic Language & Literature, Islamic University of Gaza
Rahaf Hanideq, lecturer, Islamic University of Gaza
Professor Mohamad Abu Al-Saeed, Islamic University of Gaza
Dr. Hossam Hamada, Faculty of Medicine, Islamic University of Gaza
Amin Dabbour, Professor of Political Science, Islamic University of Gaza
Dr. Mohammad Dabbour, cancer pathologist and head of the preclinical department, College of Medicine, Islamic University of Gaza
Dr. Adnan Ahmad Al-Barsh, Professor, Faculty of Medicine, Islamic University of Gaza
Mohamad Al-Bakhiet, Islamic University of Gaza

Professor Amin Al-Bahtiti, Al-Azhar University of Gaza
Bassam Shahin, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Intermediate Studies, Al Azhar University

Professor Ali Al-Qirinawi, University of Palestine
Professor Ibrahim Saidam, University of Palestine
Professor Mustafa Al-Laqta, University of Palestine
Professor Mustafa Al-Naqib, University of Palestine
Anas Al-Bursh, lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Palestine

Director Tareq Thabet, University College of Applied Sciences
Professor Shaher Yaghi, University College of Applied Sciences
Professor Wael Al-Zard, University College of Applied Sciences

Professor Mohamad Abd Al-Ghuffur, Islamic Da’wah College

Marwan Tarazi, Director, Center for Continuing Education at Birzeit University, Gaza office

Do’a Al-Masri, librarian and researcher, Edward Said Library

Faculty, academic staff and researchers (institutional affiliation incomplete):
Dr. Ziad Tatri, researcher in Neonatology and lecturer
Dr. Mohamad Adwan, professor of Medicine
Shahidah Al-Bahbani, poet and writer
Abd Al-Karim Hashash, historian, researcher, writer
Rola Fadl Abd Al-Jawad, professor of Multimedia
Muhamad Fayez al-Najjar, professor of Engineering
Hassan Al-Rafid, researcher, writer, lecturer in Economics

Dr. Rafet Lobad
Professor Khalil Abu Yahya
Dr. Maisara Al-Rayyes
Professor Sereen Al-Attar
Professor Usama Al-Muzayni
Professor Ismail Abu Sa’adah
Professor Khaled Al-Ramlawi
Professor Said Al-Dahshan
Professor Raed Qaddura
Professor Muhammad Abu-Zur
Professor Yusuf Juma’a Salameh
Professor Nida Affanah
Professor Mu’min Shuwaydah
Professor Siddiq Nassar
Professor Ahmad Abu Saadah
Professor Jamilah Al-Shanti
Professor Muhamamd Jamil Za’anin
Professor Ismail Al-Ghamri
Professor Walid Al-Amudi
Professor Abdullah Al-Amudi
Professsor Hassan Al-Radi’
Professor Muhammad Abu Amara
Professor Mahmud Al-Loh
Professor Khalid Al-Najjar
Professor Muhammad Al-Najjar
Professor Muhammad Hassounah
Professor Yasir Radwan
Professor Jihad Al-Baz
Professor Hazem Al-Jamali
Professor Muhammad Nassar
Professor Essam Al-Lulu

In our letters to Israeli government officials regarding the current war on Gaza [25 January 2024; 21 Nov 2023], we insisted that as the occupying authority, Israel’s targeting of the Palestinian educational sector buildings through bombings and other forms of aggression constituted a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, relating to the protection of civilians in time of war. The government and military’s resultant obstruction of education has also been a clear violation of the right to education enshrined in Article 26 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 13 of the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. The right to education is binding under all circumstances and to be protected in all situations, including during crises and emergencies resulting from civil strife and war. Israel is a party to the UDHR and a signatory to the ICESCR and is therefore obligated to uphold them. We remind you that as a party to the Geneva Conventions and as a leading supporter of international human rights law, the United States also bears a substantial responsibility to ensure that countries like Israel that receive substantial financial and military support from the United States observe their obligations under international human rights and humanitarian law.

The massive assaults against educational infrastructure, educators and students at all levels and throughout Gaza since 7 October are part and parcel of a larger, deliberate campaign of ethnic cleansing intended to destroy the very foundations and bases of continued Palestinian life in Gaza, in violation of all of Israel’s legal obligations and, indeed, in violation of basic precepts of humanity. See summaries and statements of the International Court of Justice 19 July 2024, 24 May 2024; MESA letter 11 March 2024.

We heed the call of our esteemed Palestinian colleagues in Gaza (Open letter 29 May 2024) to support them as they resist the brutal military onslaught and strive to continue to teach their students and rebuild their education sector. We urge the United States’ Government to demand an immediate and permanent cease-fire and the total withdrawal of Israeli military forces from the Gaza Strip – indeed, the termination of the genocidal violence against the Palestinian people.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli
MESA President
Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California

Rebuking New York University for trying to Outlaw Criticism of Israel by Conflating Zionism with Judaism

Committee on Academic Freedom — Sat, 31 Aug 2024 04:02:30 +0000

Committee on Academic Freedom | Middle East Studies Association | –

Linda G. Mills

President, New York University

linda.mills@nyu.edu

Georgina Dopico

Provost, New York University

georgina.dopico@nyu.edu . . .

We write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern about the updated Guidance and Expectations for Student Conduct which the administration of New York University (NYU) circulated to the university community on 22 August 2024. Some of the provisions of this new policy statement impose unacceptable limits on the right of students and faculty to freedom of speech and assembly, and the guidelines also threaten academic freedom. They thereby infringe on the values of open inquiry and freedom of expression that are foundational to higher education and to citizenship in a democracy.

MESA was founded in 1966 to promote scholarship and teaching on the Middle East and North Africa. The preeminent organization in the field, the Association publishes the prestigious International Journal of Middle East Studies and has nearly 2,800 members worldwide. MESA is committed to ensuring academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region in North America and outside of North America.

The new policy purports to clarify the meanings of discrimination and harassment as stipulated in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which defines discrimination as adverse treatment based on protected characteristics such as race, color or national origin. We find it disturbing that the policy’s explanation of what constitutes discriminatory or harassing behavior asserts, among other things, that “Using code words, like ‘Zionist,’ does not eliminate the possibility that your speech violates the NDAH [Non-discrimination and anti-harassment] Policy” because “For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity.” The implication that the term “Zionist” is self-evidently or always a “code word” whose use and interpretation can and should be policed by university administrators is dangerous. It is rooted in the improper conflation of criticism of Israel and of Zionism – a political ideology – with antisemitism, which we have criticized on many occasions.

We call your attention to alternative perspectives on the relationship of Judaism and Zionism, for example, the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, which has been endorsed by hundreds of eminent scholars of Jewish studies and Holocaust history. This statement rejects the conflation of Zionism with Judaism, clearly distinguishes between the two and establishes that criticism of the former (and of the actions and policies of the State of Israel) must be regarded as legitimate. We also note that equating Zionism with Judaism, as the NYU policy statement does, effaces the many Jewish students for whom Zionism is not part of their religious nor ethnic identity.

We are further concerned that the new policy gives administrators power over what goes on in NYU’s classrooms. Offering the hypothetical example of a professor teaching a class on international politics, it states that while discussing a particular country’s policies does not violate university rules, “if conduct that otherwise appears to be based on views about a country’s policies or practices is targeted at or infused with discriminatory comments…then it would implicate the NDAH.” We find this language vague and obfuscatory, and we are concerned that its intention or effect may be to shield Israeli government policies from open discussion in the classroom. The policy also undermines a bedrock principle of academic freedom: the right of faculty to determine what and how to teach their students, without interference from university administrators or external pressure groups.

We note as well that the new policy severely restricts how students may engage in protest activity on campus, but it also seems intended to apply well beyond the university campus. It asserts that student protestors have latitude to express themselves in public spaces, only to turn around and warn them that “protesting at an off-campus location does not immunize your conduct from University policies.” The new policy threatens consequences if protests have “continuing adverse effects on campus or in any NYU activity,” a dangerously vague formulation.

In short, in its explicit provisions but also in its elisions, contradictions and ambiguities, the new policy is likely to undermine the ability of students to exercise their First Amendment right to freedom of speech and assembly, while also threatening the academic freedom of NYU faculty by subjecting them to monitoring and sanctions by administrators. Regrettably, this is exactly the kind of revised policy designed to suppress student and faculty activism against which the American Association of University Professors warned in its 14 August 2024 statement.

In an earlier version of its NDAH policy, issued in 2021, NYU declared that “The University also recognizes that a critically engaged, activist student body contributes to NYU’s academic mission. Free inquiry, expression, and free association enhances academic freedom and intellectual engagement.” We find it distressing that NYU seems to have forgotten the principles to which it once claimed to adhere. We therefore call on NYU to rescind the new NDAH policy guidelines and to invite all members of the university community to engage in a transparent, collective and democratic process to develop a policy that will truly foster non-discrimination and combat all forms of racism, including antisemitism, while safeguarding academic freedom, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly on campus.

We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Aslı Ü. Bâli

MESA President

Professor, Yale Law School

Laurie Brand
Chair, Committee on Academic Freedom
Professor Emerita, University of Southern California