Your Cart is Empty
David Montgomery ‘83
Princeton Alumni Weekly
Excerpt: For the first time in memory, Princeton is inviting alumni, faculty, students, and allies to lend their voices to a broad campaign of political advocacy and public affirmation in response to the Trump administration’s unprecedented attacks on research funding and academic freedom in American higher education. “To my knowledge, this is a new kind of initiative for the University,” President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 told PAW in an early May interview about the campaign, which is called “Stand Up for Princeton and Higher Education.”
When Princeton becomes viewpoint-inclusive and when not just departments but ADMINISTRATION is cut, then I will “Stand Up”.
But Princeton does discriminate. The admissions demographics have not changed. And Princeton swore in court for 14 years that its admissions demographics would change if it was prohibited from discriminating (which it now legally is prohibited because it was doing it so egregiously and destructively).
And Princeton is not an inclusive forum for the free exchange of ideas. Leftist had a riot protesting a prime minister just two months ago. And other incidents of massive intolerance every year for the last decade.
Princeton is not safe for conservatives now. Both my daughters have told me that they needed to self-censor and hide their politics in order not to be harrassed by other students and by some of their professors.
Princeton is not the bedrock of anything any more. At best it is a ship that has lost all its moorings. Realistically it is probably closer to a cancer infecting our society with division and more leftist hate, violence, and intolerance
Yes, now Princeton pays for its arrogance and Eisgruber’s hubris. This is the way reality works.
.
.
We should stand up for free speech by demonstrating that Princeton doesn’t discriminate and is an open, safe, and inclusive forum for the free exchange of ideas. Thats the bedrock of our educational system. But they don’t want to talk???? Now we pay
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.
Isabel Vincent and Benjamin Weinthal
New York Post
Excerpt: A controversial Princeton professor with strong ties to the Iranian regime has quietly stepped down from the Ivy League school, following a campaign from dissidents to remove him.
Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a Middle East security and nuclear policy specialist, retired from his position after 15 years as the head of the school’s Program on Science and Global Security on June 1, according to an announcement listing retiring employees on Princeton’s website. The professor is controversial for being heavily involved in Iran’s chemical and nuclear programs beginning in 2004, long before the country was known to have been building up its nuclear arsenal, according to German journalist Bruno Schirra.
VANE LUCAS
May 20, 2025
I would love to stand up for Princeton and for higher education — when Princeton returns to it.