To the Officers of the University:
The freedoms of expression, inquiry, and assembly are central to the mission of the university and to the defense of a free society. Peaceful protest is both an integral part of that freedom and a proud democratic tradition on our campus.
This most fundamental freedom is always under threat, both from within these gates and without. It is at times like these, when the pressure to abandon our principles is greatest, that Princeton must not fail to make good on its promise to guarantee “all members of the University community the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn.” (RRR 1.1.3)
As representatives of the undergraduate student body, it is both our responsibility and our obligation to stand up for the expressive rights of all members of our community whenever they are threatened, without regard to the content of their speech. Recent events have made clear that now is precisely such a time.
As the Senate, therefore, we call upon the University to publicly reaffirm the right to speak and peaceably assemble. As a corollary to this, we further call upon the University not to follow the actions of our peer institutions, especially those of the University of Texas at Austin and Columbia University. Specifically, the University must commit to suspending neither student groups nor individuals without meaningful due process, only using force when required for the preservation of immediate physical safety, and never employing violence against peaceful protest.
The University must not enforce ostensibly neutral rules in uneven ways. We appreciate President Eisgruber’s recent commitment to handling protest in a viewpoint- and content-neutral manner. However, to fulfill this commitment, the University must also apply those regulations proportionally and in keeping with past practice. Any regulation must provide space for students to demonstrate peacefully without the risk of arrest or suspension. We call upon the University to demonstrate how enforcement of its regulations is in keeping with past practice, especially with regard to student arrests. Where it is unable to do so, it must remedy those actions immediately. The University must therefore drop or rectify any disciplinary charges, suspensions of students, or arrests conducted (1) in a viewpoint-discriminatory manner, (2) disproportionately, and/or (3) inconsistently with past practice.
Finally, for time, place, and manner regulations, such as those on the use of amplified sound, the University must provide reasoning for their implementation when asked (RRR 1.2.3). Those reasons should explicitly demonstrate that any regulations are viewpoint- and content-neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant University interest, and that those regulations leave open ample alternative channels for communicating the speaker’s message. We call upon the University to explicitly include these well-established principles in Rights, Rules, and Responsibilities.
Like the University, the USG also highly values building a climate of mutual respect on campus. We recognize that the freedom of expression has limits, and of course violence, true threats and harassment, defamation, and other unlawful activities are not protected speech. The University must not, however, use these narrow exceptions to the principle of freedom of expression as an excuse to close off free and open debate on this campus. We also agree with President Eisgruber’s December 13th statement that “deplores any expression of hatred directed at any individual or group.” This includes Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.
“In a word, the University’s fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.” (RRR 1.1.3) As student leaders, we share this most fundamental commitment with the University, and we call upon this administration to join us in reaffirming it in word and deed.
Given the urgent nature of this matter, the Senate requests a substantive response to this letter that explicitly addresses the requests made, especially with regard to student discipline, no later than close of business Wednesday, May 1st.
In summary, will the University commit to:
publicly reaffirming the right to speak and peaceably assemble;
suspending neither student groups nor individuals without meaningful due process;
only using force when required for the preservation of immediate physical safety;
never employing violence against peaceful protest;
demonstrating how enforcement of its regulations is in keeping with past practice and a proportional response to violations, especially with regard to student arrests;
demonstrating that any “time, place, and manner” regulations, such as those limiting the use of amplified sound or the location of assembly, are viewpoint- and content-neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a significant University interest, and leave open ample alternative channels for communicating the speaker’s message; and
dropping rectifying any disciplinary charges, suspension of students, or arrests conducting in a viewpoint-discriminatory manner, disproportionately, and/or inconsistently with past practice?