More sit-ins: the good news (from Vanderbilt) and the bad news (from Smith)

I presume you want the good news first. Sadly, it comes not from the University of Chicago but from Vanderbilt, now headed (as Chancellor) by our ex-provost Daniel Diermeier. As reported by the Nashville Tenneseean, last week more than two dozen students decided to hold a sit-in in Vandy’s administration building protesting—what else?—the University’s so-called complicity with Israel in its war with Hamas.

The students began protesting Tuesday morning after an amendment to the Vanderbilt Student Government Constitution, which would prevent student government funds from going to certain businesses that support Israel, was removed by administration officials from a student ballot in late March.

. . . .More than two dozen students entered Kirkland Hall, an administration building which houses Vanderbilt Chancellor Daniel Diermeier’s office, to hold a sit-in around 9 a.m. Tuesday, along with over 30 more students who sat on the steps outside.

Students at the protest — both inside and out — shouted chants asking for Diermeier to allow students to vote on the amendment that was removed from the ballot by administration.

Students entered the administration building around 9 a.m., and a second, larger group gathered in front of the building.

Those inside the building stayed for around 22 hours before being escorted out by Vanderbilt University Police.

The students outside protested for hours, with numbers fluctuating as students rotated in and out of class. A number of students stayed outside protesting until the students inside the building emerged.

After letting the students stay in the building for all of 22 hours (a generous dispensation!), Vanderbilt began removing them, taking names and arresting some while giving others suspensions.

Three students who sat in the chancellor’s office were arrested for assault and bodily injury to another, according to a statement from Vanderbilt University, though online jail records do not currently list any charges.

A fourth student was charged with vandalism after breaking a window on Kirkland Hall Tuesday night.

All four students have been released.

In addition to arrests, students confirmed that interim suspensions were issued to all demonstrators who entered the building.

Below is a video of the three students who were arrested for assault and causing bodily injury, pushing and shoving the poor guy who was opening the door and then trying to close it before The Entitled rushed in en masse.  From the campus to the administration office, Vandy will be free!

Seriously, this kind of assault is unconscionable.  Of course verbal protest that doesn’t violate university rules or block buildings, much less injure an employee, is fine. That’s freedom of speech, and as you’ll see below, Chancellor Diermeier took the Chicago Principles of Free Expression (and also the Kalven Principles of Institutional Neutrality) south with him when he migrated.

This was not a kneejerk reaction by the administration, which tried to persuade the demonstrators to leave for nearly an entire day. But, unlike the timorous administration of my school, there will be serious consequences for the students, including suspension (which will go on their records), and the arrested students will likely not have their charges dropped.

Below, after the first tweet in which the Entitled Students lecture a black Vanderbilt cop on why he should be on their side, you’ll see a tweet showing the letters Diermeier wrote to the parents of Vandy students as well as to the University community itself (there are three pages total). They are tempered letters but also strong and principled ones, asserting that free speech does not allow disruption of speech. That’s something that many colleges don’t seem to have learned.

I think Chancellor Deimeier, who frequently has stated a university’s role is to “foster debate, not end it,” handled this well. Far better than other universities have done in similar circumstances.

Letter to the community just sent, below. (I have a son there, who fwiw was… pic.twitter.com/e3yksOswMa

— stevemur (@stevemur) March 27, 2024

An excerpt from Diermeier’s letter to the Vandy community:

Now the best news: Chancellor Diermeier wrote an eloquent defense of Vandy’s principles, and an explanation of the University’s actions, for the Wall Street Journal. It hasn’t been archived as far as I can see, so try clicking on the screenshot below.

Because it’s not archived, I’ll give a longish excerpt:

Vanderbilt has worked hard to nurture a culture of free expression built on three pillars. The first is a determination to provide an open forum: opportunities for dialogue and debate. The second is the practice of institutional neutrality, by which university leaders refrain from publicly taking political positions to avoid indirectly stifling free thought and expression among students and faculty. Last and most distinctive is a commitment to civil discourse, the practice of respectful argument rooted in facts, which our undergraduates agree to uphold when they sign a student-authored community creed before taking their first classes.

These commitments were tested for about 24 hours starting March 26. Vanderbilt, like many universities, is home to a group of students who support the international boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. The BDS effort encourages economic and political pressure aimed at ending Israel’s current policies toward Palestinians, which organizers say are oppressive, immoral and in some cases illegal. The movement calls for economic and cultural boycotts, financial divestment and government sanctions.

. . .Some students supporting BDS declared their opposition to Vanderbilt’s institutional neutrality, calling it a cop-out, or worse. They advocated for a reversal of course on a campus referendum that would have required student government funds to follow BDS restrictions, which the university had disallowed because following those restrictions would put Vanderbilt in violation of Tennessee law. The student government isn’t legally separate from the university, and student-government funds are university funds. The law requires the university to certify each year that it isn’t involved in any boycotts of Israel, which the state defines broadly. Failing to make the certification, or acting contrary to it, would put large state contracts for the university at risk. Implementing the BDS restrictions with university funds also potentially conflicts with federal laws governing boycotts of countries friendly to the U.S.

Like all Vanderbilt students, those supporting BDS are free to speak out and demonstrate on our campus—subject, like all student groups and as at all universities, to reasonable limits on the time, place and manner of their protests.

On Tuesday, 27 students transgressed those limits when they forced their way into a closed administrative building, injuring a community-service officer in the process. Students pushed staff members and screamed profanities. Our staff took a graduated approach to de-escalating the situation, including several attempts to discuss the issues with the student group and encourage them to take a different course of action. Over 20 hours, the students were consistently informed that they were violating university policies and warned that they were subject to suspension for doing so.

Early the next morning, the Metropolitan Nashville and Davidson County Magistrate’s Office charged three students with assault. One student protesting outside the building was charged with vandalism after cracking a window. The remaining 25 students left the building voluntarily. The administration suspended all of those students on an interim basis and will all go through a rigorous accountability process to determine further disciplinary action.

Critics have claimed that Vanderbilt has abandoned its long-held commitment to free expression. They are wrong. Vanderbilt supports, teaches and defends free expression—but to do so, we must safeguard the environment for it. Students can advocate BDS. That is freedom of expression. But they can’t disrupt university operations during classes, in libraries or on construction sites. The university won’t adopt BDS principles. That’s institutional neutrality. As a community, we should always remember to treat each other with respect and rely on the force of the better argument. That’s civil discourse.

Teaching students the importance of upholding rules for free expression doesn’t squelch their right to voice their opinion—it protects it.

In these difficult times, each university will be tested. And each university will follow its own path. Our approach is clear: We clearly state the principles and rules that support our mission as a university. Then we enforce them.

That last paragraph is magnificent. And yes, the University of Chicago was tested, too, and also had—or so I thought—a clear approach, one identical to Vanderbilt’s. The difference is in the last sentence. Vanderbilt enforces their principles; we don’t. (See my post from yesterday.)

I’m not sure whether Diermeier is Jewish, but he certainly fits the criteria for being a mensch.

**************

Now the bad news: In the meantime, the administration of the elite Smith College are acting very un-Deiermeierish, allowing the students to occupy College Hall, the administration building, for over a week. The administration, according to this Inside Higher Ed piece by Johanna Alonso, is sitting with its thumb up its fundament trying to figure out what to do with the Occupiers.

The protestors, are, of course, asking Smith to divest from Israel. (Sitter-inners are always big fans of Palestine.) They appear to be largely (surprise!) members of Students for Justice in Palestine.

The administration has already said that divestment will “not likely be considered unless ‘materially different information is brought forward’,”, so they’ve evinced some moxie, but they need to boot those protestors back onto campus.

Click to read.

An excerpt:

In the latest face-off between students and administrators over the war in Gaza, students at Smith College have been occupying the main administrative building on campus for almost a week, demanding the institution divest from weapons manufacturers that supply military machinery to Israel. The protesters say they will not leave College Hall until the institution commits to divestment, according to statements on the social media pages of the college’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter, which is spearheading the demonstration.

Approximately 50 students are participating in the protest, SJP members said on social media; photos show that students have brought pillows, air mattresses, large amounts of food and other items into the building. A photo showed a Palestinian flag bearing the words “Smith divest now” flying above College Hall, where the American flag is typically displayed.

No arrests or student conduct charges have been made, although students “are allegedly in violation of several elements of the Student Code of Conduct including unauthorized entry or use of a building, abuse of property, and disruption of college activities,” Carolyn McDaniel, Smith’s director of media relations, wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed.

This is how sit-ins disrupt the functioning of a college:

According to McDaniel, the protest has had an impact on students’ abilities to access certain offices located inside College Hall, including Student Financial Services, the Office of Disability Services and the Title IX office.

The occupation, she wrote, has made it difficult for “those with pressing needs to get the help they deserve. We are aware, for example, of a family who drove a considerable distance to discuss FAFSA assistance from financial services and they weren’t sure how to proceed upon learning that the office was inaccessible. We were able to help them in other ways, but it caused this family needless concern.”

Now there’s a dilemma for progressives: Title IX and disability services versus SJP. (SJP is winning.)

The articles notes that there are a lot of Smithereens who agree with the protest, but not everyone:

However, others have expressed dismay over the occupation. According to one anonymous email purportedly from a Smith student to Inside Higher Ed, the institution “has become a terrifying place with absolutely no consequence for breaking the law.”

“The college refuses to do anything to hold them accountable, and now the front doorstep of what’s supposed to be a brilliant college for smart women looks like a tent city of anti-Semitic drum circlers,” the author wrote.

Well, someone has a sense of humor! But it appears that a climate of antisemitism is infecting Smith, as it is some other schools.

The sit-in also comes after several antisemitic incidents occurred at Smith earlier in March. Swastikas were found on crosswalks and in two cases mezuzahs, religious symbols that some Jewish people affix to their doorframes, were ripped down near campus, the Boston Globe reported last month.

I would advise Smith’s president, Sarah Willie-Le Breton, to follow Diermeier’s lead—if she has the moxie.

h/t: Ginger K.