The article “University Again Revises Rules for Contact, Communication” by Julie Bonette (March issue) honestly reflects ongoing uncertainty in the University’s management of freedom of expression in today’s troubled environment.
Such uncertainty is neither surprising nor inappropriate, considering the complex issues that have arisen on campuses throughout the nation since Oct. 7, 2023. Indeed, Princeton seems to have fared better than other prominent universities, perhaps due to cautious administrative deliberation. No doubt, we are grateful that President Eisgruber ’83
was not on the invitation list for the U.S. House of Representatives hearing on campus antisemitism in December. Having interviewed 11 viable applicants for our Class of 2028 within the last three months, I was pleased to note that these high school seniors generally regarded Princeton as a stable safe haven compared with other Ivy League campuses, especially Harvard.
Going forward, Princeton’s administration may wish to consolidate its relative success by providing:
1. Reconfirmation of Princeton’s historic commitment to freedom of speech, as defined by our founding fathers in the Bill of Rights.
2. Clarification that advocacy for violent criminal activities, such as murder, torture, rape, or genocide, is not tolerated in our University community.
3. Clear explanation regarding the no contact and no communication order procedure, pending rapid investigation of any potentially inflammatory incident.
In so many ways, Princeton can and must remain the best place of all!