Your Cart is Empty
Today the following letter was sent to President Eisgruber from the Princetonians for Free Speech Executive Committee regarding the protests and event disruption that occurred on April 7th in McCosh Hall:
April 9, 2025
Dear President Eisgruber:
We, the officers of Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS), are writing to express our organization’s very deep concerns about the disruption of the program featuring former Israel Prime Minister Naftali Bennett on April 7 and actions of severe antisemitism during and after that program.
As you know, PFS is a Princeton alumni organization created to promote the values of free speech, academic freedom, and viewpoint diversity at Princeton. Over 7,500 Princeton alumni subscribe to our email updates and regular reports. This large number, a number that is growing rapidly, is a testament to the concern of alumni about these values.
We appreciate the statement you put out on April 8 condemning the disruption and antisemitism. But more needs to be done.
First, given the recent history of protests at Princeton after the terrorist attack on Israel and incidents of antisemitism on campus, it seems remarkable that Princeton was not better prepared to stop what occurred on April 7. The appearance of a former Israeli Prime Minister might be expected to generate disruptive and potentially violent actions. The preparations and the tepid response that night were both clearly inadequate. As just one example, why were students allowed to wear masks to hide their identity in the room where the event took place?
It is critical now that the University’s actions taken against those who broke university rules and First Amendment protections be swift and appropriate to the severity of what was done. PFS applauded you for the strong message you delivered at the commencement of this year’s entering class about the importance of free speech and Princeton’s rules thereon. However, rules are meaningless unless enforced. Clearly, some members of the Princeton community, including students and faculty, do not respect the rules and do not believe they will be enforced. It is vital that appropriate punishment be given in this case, including suspension and possibly expulsion. It has been clearly demonstrated that a lack of real enforcement of the rules on various campuses, including Princeton, has encouraged more rule-breaking disruption.
Even before the events of April 7, Princeton was among those universities receiving extra scrutiny by the public and policy makers. With this new development, we fear that the reputation of Princeton has been badly tarnished in ways that will have severe long-term repercussions. Strong action is required.
Sincerely,
Stuart Taylor, Jr., PFS President
Edward Yingling, PFS Secretary
Todd Rulon-Miller, PFS Treasurer
Leslie Spencer, PFS Vice-Chair
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.
