The encampments that have sprung up on various college campuses around the nation have created an admittedly difficult landscape for college administrators in those places to navigate.
They want to maintain order but at the same time preserve the right of students and faculty to protest what they feel is an injustice — in this case the Israeli response in Gaza to last October’s terrorist attack by Hamas.
The protesters claim the Israeli military campaign to eliminate Hamas is disproportionate, having claimed a reported 34,000 Palestinian lives, the majority of them civilians, and widespread devastation in Gaza. Those protests, though, have been tainted by strains of antisemitism, and counter-protests have been launched by supporters of Israel.
The role of the college presidents is not to determine which side is right in this argument. Rather their job is to run their universities in a way that is least disruptive to the learning experience of those who attend these schools, while recognizing that spirited but peaceful debate — including over difficult topics — is part of that learning experience.
Some presidents and the government authorities with whom they coordinate have struck a good balance; others have not.
Some have given too much leeway to the pro-Palestinian supporters, letting them occupy parts of their campuses for extended periods of time and infringing on the lives of students who may be trying to study or sleep or celebrate their upcoming graduation. Columbia University, where the protests began and whose president has vacillated in her response to them, moved away from in-person classes, which is unfair to those students whose families may be paying top dollar for an Ivy League education. The University of Southern California, apparently fearing violence, canceled its commencement ceremony.
Others have responded too harshly, such as at the University of Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott seemed more inclined to inflame the situation by encouraging students to be expelled and arrests made even before it was clear whether any laws or school policies had been broken.
There, the school had provided roughly equal and ample space for protests by both pro-Palestinian pro-Israeli students. However, when a small band of pro-Palestinian students pushed past a security guard, injuring him in the process, and walked into a university facility that was closed for protests, the school put its foot down. Four students were arrested, and more than 20 were subjected to university discipline.
What Vanderbilt did, and what French encourages, is for universities to “protect free speech, respect civil disobedience and uphold the rule of law. That means universities should protect the rights of students and faculty members on a viewpoint-neutral basis, and they should endeavor to make sure that every member of the campus community has the same access to campus facilities and resources.”
That includes setting content-neutral rules for all sides to follow in terms of the time, place and manner for protests. For example, extended encampments should not be allowed because that lets one viewpoint monopolize public space that the other side has a right to use as well.
Once fair rules are established and communicated, those who refuse to abide by them must accept the consequences, whether that be arrest by police or campus discipline, includ ingthe possibility of being expelled in the case of students or being fired in the case of faculty.
