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.
Since the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, top colleges and universities have faced an onslaught of federal attacks: slashing grant money for research, pressuring schools to end diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, cracking down on visas for international students, and ending graduate program sponsorship for active duty military at top schools. However, some Ivy League universities — the center of many of Trump’s ongoing attacks — have decreased messaging on the potential consequences of these federal directives.
“One thing that’s been clear is that a lot of universities have felt that publicity would bring no advantage or do them no good,” history professor David Bell GS ’91, who has been outspoken about federal actions against universities, said in an interview with The Daily Princetonian.
As a professor who is known to dissent from progressive ideologies that are dominant at universities such as Princeton, where I’ve taught for nearly 40 years, I’m frequently asked by students for advice about how to navigate a campus they worry will be hostile to them. Some are pro-Israel, or politically and socially conservative, or religiously observant.
They fear being treated unfairly by faculty members who are hostile to their beliefs. Many are afraid of being regarded as outcasts by their more liberal or progressive peers. They worry about being excluded from academic opportunities or not treated equitably in social or other extracurricular activities. To these students I say, with regret: You’re right to worry. I’ve seen these things happen.
Universities may be tempted to treat these capabilities as inevitable improvements in education. Students will be able to consume vast amounts of information, more than ever before. But like AI writing itself, such consumption would be vast but shallow. The more interesting possibility, then, is that AI will force universities to rediscover the value of intellectual work that cannot be outsourced.