Princeton Changes No Contact Order Rules After Student Pushback

Danielle Shapiro ’25 was the subject of a complaint in the spring and wrote about her experience in ‘The Wall Street Journal’

This is an image of two articles on websites: One on The Princeton Tory about a demonstration at the Center for Jewish Life; and one in the opinion section of the Wall Street Journal headlined: "I Committed Journalism, and Princeton Told Me Not to Communicate."

By Julie Bonette

Published Oct. 4, 2022

3 min read

Princeton made changes to its no communication and no contact order (NCO) rules after a student criticized the policy in the spring and wrote an op-ed published by The Wall Street Journal in September, University spokesman Michael Hotchkiss told PAW.

Danielle Shapiro ’25 wrote about being on the receiving end of an NCO last spring when working as a journalist for the conservative student newspaper The Princeton Tory and trying to connect with Harshini Abbaraju ’22, who filed the complaint.

Shapiro said she met Abbaraju at a Feb. 22 protest organized by the Princeton Committee on Palestine and followed up via email to confirm information. She said she was notified of the NCO two days after her article was published.

Shapiro told PAW she did not engage in harassment.

In emails to PAW, Abbaraju, who has since graduated, characterized Tory writers as having a “bad-faith, stalkerish pursuit of pro-Palestine activists,” and that their articles contained “numerous harmful mistruths and mischaracterizations,” leading her to seek the NCO.

Although NCOs may be intended to head off sexual harassment or other types of altercations, the controversy surrounding Shapiro highlighted concerns about the policy, such as whether it’s too broad and the threshold for enacting an order too low.

Said Hotchkiss: “Since the events described in The Wall Street Journal opinion piece, students seeking a no communication order in situations where there hasn’t been any significant conflict have been asked to first communicate in writing with the other party and let them know they wish to have no contact. If that request isn’t honored, the request for an NCO is reviewed.”

Online information about Princeton’s NCOs can now be found on the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students site under “Conflict Resolution” as well as on the Sexual Harassment/Assault Advising, Resources Education site.

Shapiro disputes when the policy was updated. “The University did not change the policy as a result of my reporting in The Wall Street Journal,” she told PAW.

The updated policy does not apply to concerns related to sexual misconduct. Shapiro said the NCO she received directed her to Princeton’s Sexual Misconduct and Title IX site for more information.

“From the [Journal] article, I can’t see any nexus between the conduct and Title IX,” said John Clune, a Title IX lawyer from Hutchinson Black and Cook LLC.

Lindsie Rank, student press counsel at the free-speech group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), told PAW that when Title IX is “used incorrectly, you can end up undermining free expression. And in this case … it was weaponized against this journalist.”

Rank also said that if Princeton had “concerns that this student journalist was harassing the source, then they should have done at least an initial investigation to find out if there was actual harassment that was occurring here.”

Shapiro said she wasn’t provided with an opportunity to defend herself before the NCO was issued.

Princeton declined to release statistics detailing how many NCOs it has issued, but Myles McKnight ’23, a Tory contributor and president of the Princeton Open Campus Coalition, detailed his own experience receiving an NCO when he spoke at a University-sponsored event about free expression during this year’s freshman orientation.

Both McKnight and Shapiro were successful in their petitions to remove their NCOs, though Shapiro found the process to be unsatisfactory. In the Journal, she wrote: “Princeton has transformed a shield against harassment into a sword against the press.”

After reviewing Princeton’s updated NCO policy, Rank added that “I still think that the University needs to really critically think about the ways in which issuing these kinds of no contact orders, especially in the context of student press, can cause a chilling effect.”

Published in the November 2022 Issue

2022 2025 Administration

2 Responses

Thankful Vanderstar ’88

1 Year Ago

So many things concern me about the University’s use of no contact/communication orders (NCOs). As someone who has volunteered in the fields of domestic and sexual violence, I understand the value of protecting students from stalking and harassment. As an attorney, I wonder whether the process for obtaining/granting an NCO is sound and worry about the great potential for abuse.

I write specifically, however, to express my dismay at the University’s apparent failure to recognize an opportunity to educate its students. Students with passionate views who engage in public discourse in order to bring about change must recognize that they may — and in fact should want to — invite the attention of the press. It is imperative that journalists check their facts and confirm their sources, and the only way for them to do so is to contact those about whom they report. Of course, any individual has the absolute right not to talk to members of the press, and journalists should be respectful in their communications and should refrain from further contact with someone if asked. Furthermore, when the press gets it wrong, there are remedies: letters to the editor, requests for retraction or clarification, approaching other media outlets to publicize the inaccurate reporting. I, of course, cannot know the details of what happened between journalist Danielle Shapiro ’25 and Harshini Abbaraju ’22 beyond what was reported in the PAW and Wall Street Journal articles, both of which I read. I wish the PAW article had given me more information: Did Ms. Abbaraju tell Ms. Shapiro she did not want to speak to her or ask her not to contact her again, before resorting to an NCO? Did Ms. Abbaraju contact Ms. Shapiro after her article was published and express her concerns about its contents? Did Ms. Abbaraju write a letter to the editor of The Princeton Tory seeking to correct the mistruths and mischaracterizations she claims appeared in its reporting, or seek any other remedy for any inaccurate reporting? Did Ms Abbaraju contact the editorial staff at The Princeton Tory to report that its reporters were engaging in harassing behavior of pro-Palestine activists?

Based on the PAW and WSJ articles, it would appear that the University may have missed the chance to prepare Ms. Abbaraju for what may very well be future interactions with the press, given her activism, and to teach her how to navigate that important relationship. This is highly disappointing, especially considering that this article appears in the same issue that features the excerpt of President Eisgruber’s address to the Class of 2026 about free speech, and that not less than a year ago the University bestowed its highest undergraduate honor on Maria Ressa ’86, the journalist who was awarded the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize. The press is an ever more crucial bulwark in the desperate, worldwide fight for freedom and democracy, and all of us must do our part to ensure that the press can do its work unfettered.

James Stewart ’58

1 Year Ago

Princeton’s no-contact orders (On the Campus, November issue) are extralegal and thus should not exist in an institution that should follow the rule of law. No university has the right to act as judge and jury because it is neither.

Either charge the student with an offense under federal or New Jersey law or cease and desist with any no-contact order.