Institutional Neutrality, Restraint or Convenience?

In the fall of 2023 and winter of 2024, college campuses across the U.S. experienced protests and encampments in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 terrorist attack on Israel by the Islamist militant group Hamas, and Israel’s subsequent invasion of Gaza. These protests reinvigorated the debate about whether and to what extent colleges and universities should remain neutral on social and political issues, as well as the nature and extent of the institutional obligation to protect the ability of faculty and students to express their points of view. In March 1967, a committee at the University of Chicago released the “Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action,” which became known as the Kalven Report. The report concluded that the protection of faculty and students’ self-expression could only be guaranteed through an ideologically neutral university. The report asserted that an institutional view on public matters risked censoring and alienating members of the community who held dissenting views. It described how “the instrument of dissent and criticism is the individual faculty member or the individual student,” while the University “is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not itself the critic.” Embracing neutrality would only apply to the University as an institution, not to any individual within it, and the report emphasized this would provide a platform for diverse opinions to thrive, signaling a deep respect for free inquiry. The report did note that in exceptional circumstances, it may be appropriate for an institution to weigh in on social and political matters. The report became a foundational document for colleges and universities across the country, but its prominence over the years had varied depending on the moment. In 2023 and 2024, as protests and turmoil rocked campuses across the U.S., the report’s principles again took center stage, as institutions of higher learning were forced to directly address the long-standing questions: should they take public positions on social and political issues and to what extent should they protect the ability of faculty and students to express their views?