Your Cart is Empty
August 19, 2025
By Tal Fortgang ‘17
Columbia University’s recent settlement with the Trump administration represents a long-awaited watershed moment in the ongoing battle between the federal government and American universities. Its arrival is enormously symbolic within the ongoing saga and is a sign of things to come. How would the federal government treat free speech and academic freedom concerns? Was it looking to avoid going to court, or would it welcome the opportunity to litigate formally? And how much would each side be willing to compromise on its deeply entrenched positions?
A settlement – better described as a deal, not merely because dealmaking is the President’s preferred framework for governance but because the feds did not actually sue Columbia -- was always the most likely outcome of the showdown. It is not inherently inappropriate as a resolution to legitimate civil rights concerns, though the administration probably could have achieved its objectives more sustainably had it followed the procedure set out in civil rights law. Nevertheless, a deal has been struck, and assessing it is more complex than simply deeming it good or bad by virtue of its existing – though many certainly wish each side had simply declined to negotiate with the other.
Digging into the deal – and attending to its silences -- reveals a combination of promising reforms, distractions, and even some failures. Most critically, the agreement’s silence on admissions and hiring practices suggests that the underlying issues that precipitated this crisis will likely resurface, creating a cycle of federal intervention that will relegate this episode to a footnote.
Sena Chang
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Antisemitic graffiti of a gray swastika was found on the wall of a graduate student apartment building inside the Lakeside housing complex in mid-July. The graffiti was removed immediately following multiple reports, with the Department of Public Safety (DPS) opening an investigation into the incident and increasing foot patrols in the area in response, according to University spokesperson Jennifer Morrill.
Construction was underway inside Lakeside at the time of the incident, and the University has not yet determined whether the graffiti was the work of a student or contractor. No suspects have been named.
Samuel J. Abrams
Minding the Campus
Excerpt: When Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber turned on his fellow university leaders at an April panel discussion, all but accusing Vanderbilt and Washington University chancellors of “carrying water for the Trump administration,” he revealed the dangerous delusion gripping elite academia.
This wasn’t a debate about abstract principles. It was Eisgruber’s desperate attempt to maintain the fiction that elite universities are victims rather than perpetrators, that accountability is oppression, and that denial can substitute for leadership.
Tom Williams '77
December 16, 2023
12/16/2023
Hello Fellow PU grads interested in free speech:
While we’ve been aware for some time of the “All animals are equal but some are more equal than others” attitude of Princeton’s officialdom, I find this recent outbreak of antisemitism to be particularly egregious. Attitudes toward Jews, which often also manifest themselves against Christians, are the obvious canary in the coal mine.
There is a serious problem here, namely, an inability of the Princeton administration to see itself as others see it. We may not be the worst offenders among the Ivy Universities, but it is disturbing to see the immediate bias.
I decry the loss of life in the Middle East on a regular basis. Israel is, as far as I know, the only truly democratic state in a sea of despotism. And I know that Israel’s military has made mistakes. But they abide by (or attempt to do so) normal military codes of international law. Do any of the other nations in the region even attempt to do the same?
I don’t see much hope for true peace in the Middle East until Israel’s right to exist is accepted and actual tolerance of other religions and viewpoints is accepted. It would also be helpful if the long, complicated history of armed conflict in the region would be viewed as an unfortunate past that is accepted rather than a litany of grievances that must drive conflict in the future. Please let us bury the hatchet and start from scratch.
Tom Williams’77