New Reunions policy information regarding free expression
Excerpt: As we enter this celebratory time, please be reminded of the University’s principles and policies related to free expression. Our Statement on Freedom of Expression guarantees our community “the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn,” while also noting that members of our community “may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe.”
Accordingly, the University does not permit anyone to disrupt another’s free expression rights, even in the name of dissent. The University also prohibits abusive or harassing behavior through its policies, including in its overall conduct requirement of respect for others. Attendees at Reunions events will receive one more warning beyond this note not to disrupt an event or prevent an invited guest from speaking. Disruptive behavior may result in immediate removal from the event and disciplinary action or other consequences, including being barred from campus and/or arrest. Princeton’s guidelines and rules relating to protest activity are compiled at protests.princeton.edu.
Comments will be approved before showing up.
Prestigious universities and leading state schools across the nation have embraced viewpoint diversity by building new institutions—civic education centers and the like—which are simultaneously on yet apart from the campus. Harvard has quietly taken a different tack. Over the past several months, the university’s top brass have been asking major donors for $10 million gifts to endow new professorships under the banner of “viewpoint diversity.” Provost John Manning, a scholar often associated with the conservative legal movement, has led the effort, aiming to place between 20 and 30 new faculty across schools and departments rather than siloed in a standalone institute.
Why Harvard would need additional funding for this is an open question, but putting that partly aside, we ought to ask what to make of this unique initiative. It stands a chance of being either the most consequential reform attempt in elite higher education this decade, or a sophisticated piece of reputation management serving double duty as a clever fundraiser. Which one it turns out to be depends on whether Harvard has thought carefully about what viewpoint diversity means, and whether it intends to execute in line with a considered answer.
Are some schools better at fostering intellectual diversity than others? The study clearly reveals that the most elite universities are among those with the least ideological diversity. Princeton is ranked 13 out of the 55 in the study, with its faculty slightly more ideologically diverse than, for instance, UC Berkeley, Brown, Dartmouth and Harvard, and slightly less diverse than Stanford, Cornell, UCLA or Georgetown.
There is little doubt that this study provides another opening for politicians and critics to attack higher education, perhaps in unfair ways. Princeton could help neutralize this by joining those reform-minded university leaders in the now burgeoning effort to regain the public’s trust in higher education.
A federal judge ruled last month that the National Endowment for the Humanities’ (NEH) termination of more than 1,400 grants in April 2025 had violated the Constitution on several counts. Princeton researchers await the effects of the verdict, which ordered that the NEH must rescind its termination notices.