Princeton Free Speech News & Commentary

Elisabeth Stewart
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: Last Thursday, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) addressed a letter to President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 accusing Princeton University community members of leveraging no-contact and no-communication orders (NCOs) to “censor student journalists.”

The letter from the ADL and FIRE made an explicit connection between the issue of NCOs and the campus conversation surrounding the conflict in Israel and Palestine.

Emily Aronson
Princeton University

Excerpt: Princeton has released its third annual Diversity, Equity and Inclusion report, which shares the important work of students, faculty, staff and alumni to build community and support success and belonging at the University. The report highlights Princeton’s long-term and continuing efforts to be more diverse, inclusive, accessible and accountable.

The report provides a snapshot of the many initiatives, programs and events that occurred during the 2022-23 year — all of which were open to all members of the University.

It summarizes a range of activities under the themes of: climate, inclusion and equity, such as workshops on Jewish identity, inclusion and antisemitism available to students and staff of all faiths and ethnicities; academic experience, such as workshops on free speech and academic freedom led by the national organization PEN America for senior administrators, staff, faculty and others; and outreach and access, such as the new Transfer Scholars Initiative supporting the success of talented community college students from across New Jersey.

Dear President Eisgruber:

FIRE and the Anti-Defamation League write to express our collective concern about
Princeton University’s improper use of no-contact orders to censor students.

In the wake of the October 7 Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel, contentious debates on the conflict have dominated campus discourse.4 Yet Princeton is stifling these discussions and newsgathering by its student press, by permitting students who dislike certain speech to be granted no-communication or no-contact orders against other students.

Keith E. Whittington
Chronicle of Higher Education

Excerpt: Barnard College has become the site of the latest flare-up in an ongoing struggle between faculty and university leaders for the control of university communication platforms. On October 23, the department of women’s, gender, and sexuality studies posted a statement of solidarity: “We support the Palestinian people who have resisted settler colonial war, occupation, and apartheid for over 75 years, while deploring Hamas’s recent killing of Israeli civilians.”

Shortly afterward, the university removed the statement from the departmental website. The move was in pursuit of the university’s “website governance policy” (established in November, after the department’s initial statement), which specifies that all subdomains of barnard.edu Internet domain are property of the college. Barnard is hardly alone in debating such issues. Princeton University recently tabled a policy aimed at formalizing procedures for units of the university to issue political statements.

January 25, 2024
Christopher L. Eisgruber
Office of the President
Princeton University
1 Nassau Hall
Princeton, New Jersey 08544
Sent via U.S. Mail and Electronic Mail (eisgruber@princeton.edu)

Dear President Eisgruber:
FIRE and the Anti-Defamation League write to express our collective concern about Princeton University’s improper use of no-contact orders to censor students.

Signed by Alex Morey and James Pasch
Letter from FIRE and ADL

Excerpt: FIRE and the Anti-Defamation League write to express our collective concern about Princeton University’s improper use of no-contact orders to censor students.

In the wake of the October 7 Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel, contentious debates on the conflict have dominated campus discourse. Yet Princeton is stifling these discussions and newsgathering by its student press, by permitting students who dislike certain speech to be granted no-communication or no-contact orders against other students. While no-contact protocols are important tools to keep students safe from properly defined discriminatory harassment, and threatening, intimidating, or assaultive conduct, Princeton appears to be granting these orders for any student who requests one, so long as minimal procedural prerequisites are satisfied.