Your Cart is Empty
Last Friday, the following letter was sent to President Eisgruber from the Princetonians for Free Speech Executive Committee regarding further action after the protests and event disruption that occurred on April 7th in McCosh Hall, and preparatory measures for upcoming campus events:
April 18, 2025
Dear President Eisgruber,
On April 9, we wrote to you regarding our deep concerns about the disruption of the program featuring former Israel Prime Minister Naftali Bennett on April 7 and actions of antisemitism during and after that program.
Princetonians for Free Speech is an alumni organization created to promote free speech, academic freedom, and viewpoint diversity at Princeton. Over 7,500 Princeton alumni subscribe to our email updates and regular reports, a number that is growing steadily.
In our letter, we congratulated you on your statement of April 8 condemning the disruption and antisemitic expression. We noted that more needed to be done. We stated that the planning for the protest at the event and the handling of the event by Princeton officials was clearly inadequate and that swift action needed to be taken against those who broke rules.
As you know, on Tuesday, April 22, Yechiel Leiter, the Ambassador to the U.S. from Israel is scheduled to speak on campus. We are most concerned that this will generate another attempt to disrupt an event and more antisemitic attacks. Our contacts on campus say that it appears that nothing has been done by the Princeton Administration that would deter such actions. We are aware that investigations, including interviewing those present at the April 7 event, are taking place, but it seems likely that this will be a long, drawn-out process. There has been no statement relating to the University’s procedures followed on April 7 being reviewed or strengthened.
If Princeton does not act decisively in the next few days with respect to the April 22 event, it is possible that the shocking disruptions of April 7 will be repeated. If that happens the impact on Princeton’s reputation and finances will be dramatic. There has already been much media criticism of Princeton over April 7, including in an editorial in the Wall Street Journal and in a column by the respected Jonathan Turley. We have heard from many alumni who are angry that the events of April 7 were allowed to happen.
Princeton’s rules are clear, but they are not being enforced. Princeton’s Statement on Freedom of Expression (contained in Section 1.1.3 of its regulations) states that “…the University has a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate and deliberation but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it.” Certainly, on April 7, the University completely failed in that “solemn responsibility.”
Princeton’s Guidelines and Policies on its webpage on Protests and Free Expression states: “A wide range of protest activity is allowed, but protests must not create a hostile environment (or otherwise violate the law), or significantly disrupt University operations and events.” Clearly the protestors on April 7 violated that policy. A hostile environment for Jewish students exists.
While action should have been taken sooner, there is still time to avoid a repeat of April 7. Princeton should immediately issue a statement warning people that its rules will be strictly enforced, including arrests, and containing the specific points listed below.
Pending a more comprehensive rule, Princeton should at least announce that no masks will be allowed to be worn at any protest of the April 22 event. Princeton has every right to do this, and in fact many universities have enacted general no-mask rules.
Princeton should announce that while protestors have the right to express their views, they do not have the right to shout and make loud banging noises that are disruptive to the program, as took place on April 7. The April 7 protestors clearly violated Princeton’s policy on “Protests and Dissident Activities,” which states: “Activities that take place in the vicinity of University classrooms, laboratories, libraries, the chapel, offices, and similar facilities must be conducted in a manner that respects the necessity for maintaining a reasonable degree of quiet in such areas.”
Princeton should announce that there will be zero tolerance for any antisemitic statements or symbols directed at students or other participants in the event and that the identity of anyone making such statements will be immediately noted.
Princeton should state its rules relating to protests up front and do away with the series of warnings in the room of the event. Those entering the event should be given a copy of the rules. Unlike on April 7, Princeton officials should not give repeated warnings to protestors, which only served to further delay the program.
Princeton should announce that the person or persons responsible for pulling the fire alarm on April 7 will be expelled.
Princeton’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine should be warned not to promote activities that will violate rules, and its actions should be monitored to make sure it is not organizing and promoting such activities. The role of the chapter in the April 7 events should be a focus of the current investigation. There is strong evidence that this chapter did promote activities that broke rules and created a very hostile environment for Jewish students. There is email evidence that chapter members celebrated the pulling of the fire alarm and may have been complicit in it.
Finally, Princeton should make sure there is a sufficient number of university officials and police at the event to swiftly address any problems that might disrupt the event.
President Eisgruber, your strong statements on free speech, including during the orientation last Fall, and Princeton’s rules provide a solid foundation to protect free speech on campus. You have been very clear in condemning antisemitism. If there is yet another disruption and/or more antisemitic attacks around the April 22 event, any remaining credibility Princeton may have on those issues will disappear.
Sincerely Yours,
Stuart Taylor, PFS President
Ed Yingling, PFS Secretary
Leslie Spencer, PFS Vice-Chair
Todd Rulon-Miller, PFS Treasurer
Comments will be approved before showing up.
In a few minutes, all of you will walk out of this stadium as newly minted graduates of this University. Before you do, however, long-standing tradition permits the University president to offer a few remarks about the path that lies ahead.
In having a truly diverse group of students share their perspectives, Princeton makes known that there exists a home for every viewpoint. However, as much as I believe this claim to be true, there are unfortunately those who do not. It is easy to dismiss the Princeton administration and culture as entirely polarizing and ideologically biased. In fact, it is true that many here hold the same dominant perspective . But to focus on this fact alone, to rest our entire judgement on one such observation, runs the dangerous risk of neglecting the clear and persistent efforts of this University to encourage every student—even the conservative ones—to share the beliefs that he or she so earnestly pursues.
On April 15, I had the pleasure of hosting, on behalf of the Cliosophic Society, Ambassador John Bolton at Princeton’s Nassau Inn for a discussion entitled “The Room Where It Happened: National Security Decisions Under Pressure.” Bolton’s legacy as a leading professional in American foreign policy offered more than a glimpse behind the diplomatic curtain; it invited a critical examination of the processes and personalities that have shaped recent American engagement with the world.
