Respected academic institutions around the globe have grappled with upholding the freedom of speech, often which leads to contended standpoints and actions. Among them, prominent universities such as Stanford and the occurrences revolving around Amy Wax’s PragerU talking points have been brought into focus.
Recently, Columbia University has come under scrutiny for using police force in response to peaceful protests on campus. Along with this, the suspension of a large number of students involved in these protests drew sharp backlash. Professors from the law department of Columbia University openly expressed their disappointment at the university’s response. In a letter to the university leadership, they marked that the peaceful encampment formed by the protesters did not pose an imminent threat to public safety.
Law professors, in their response, condemned the university’s move, deeming it procedural irregularity in addition to viewing it as a tacit disregard for legal norms. They pointed out the absence of transparency in decision making and the problematic involvement of the New York Police Department (NYPD). Urging the university to align student discipline to clear and well-established procedures, they emphasized respect to the rule of law.
Historically, major Columbia protests have resulted in similar police crackdowns. For instance, in 1968, during protests against the Vietnam war, the university followed a milder disciplinary approach compared to the current reactions.
An active silence seemed to be in place, concerning the university’s perspective on the matter. However, the stance of the professors in upholding legal fortitude and the necessity of due process is significant, as it sends a clear message about conformity to procedural justice in any sphere.