Despite Magill’s departure, Penn must stay the course on free speech issues | Editorial
It is essential that the university does not allow the recent chaotic series of events to further compromise its commitment to open expression and academic inquiry.
University of Pennsylvania president Liz Magill’s tenure came to a premature end last Saturday, and her tumultuous exit after just 18 months on the job will endure as a symbol of the broader chaotic national conversation about freedom of expression and antisemitism on college campuses.
Magill’s difficulties began in September when a festival devoted to Palestinian literature was held on Penn’s campus over the objections of the Anti-Defamation League, prominent university donors, and others who condemned the inclusion of speakers who had expressed antisemitic views.
While Magill allowed the festival to proceed, she also denounced some of the speakers and issued a statement pledging to review the process by which groups can reserve space and host events on campus. Things might have ended there.
But on Oct. 7, Hamas terrorists launched a vicious raid into Israel, killing more than 1,200 people and taking an estimated 240 hostages back to Gaza. The already intense debate over the festival erupted on Penn’s campus.
Some students, staff, and faculty were captured on video taking down awareness posters for people taken hostage. Pro-Israel groups began hiring trucks to drive around the neighborhood bearing digital billboards calling for Magill’s resignation.
When Penn Chavurah, a progressive Jewish student group, announced that it planned to show the film Israelism — a documentary critical of the Israeli government’s policies — the administration threatened sanctions. The head of the university’s Middle East Center resigned his position in protest.
Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian students called on Penn to stand up for them, describing the campus and community as a hostile environment. Some Jewish students cited chants like “From the river to the sea” as calls for genocide, and demanded more action from the school.
The tipping point for Magill, however, was her testimony before the House Committee on Education last week, where she gave a muddled answer to a question on student discipline. The moment led the White House, Gov. Josh Shapiro, and other civic leaders to openly criticize her response.
Four days after Magill’s congressional testimony, her tenure ended, along with that of Scott L. Bok, chair of the university’s board of trustees.
It is essential that Penn does not allow the turbulence of this unfortunate series of events to further compromise its commitment to freedom of speech and academic expression. While Magill may not have been up to the challenge of navigating through the current crisis, the difficulty was inflated by others, many of whom were clearly not operating in good faith.
From Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ “war on woke” to the proposals in nearly two dozen state legislatures to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, higher education has in recent years become a focal point for conservative activists who are threatened by what they see as rampant liberalism on the nation’s college campuses.
Penn should pay heed to some of the students and institutional leaders who have already offered sound advice.
Instead of listening to donors and outside voices, Penn should pay heed to some of the students and institutional leaders who have already offered sound advice.
As the editorial board of Penn’s student-run newspaper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, wrote earlier this week, the ongoing debate has made campus “feel less like a community and more like a political battleground.” Given the evidence-free statements, entrenched positions, and general ignorance that American politics have become known for, that can hardly be conducive to learning.
Instead, as the students wrote, “The path forward for Penn must be paved with more, not less, speech.”
At times, that will include speech that makes some uncomfortable, across a number of intractable political divides. The inevitable questions surrounding any speech code are limitless, something Magill learned the hard way. Bok, writing in an op-ed this week, also emphasized the importance of academic freedom and avoiding being pushed around by angry donors.
By making a clear commitment to free speech, Penn’s administration can avoid weighing in on every campus controversy, and can instead focus on keeping students, staff, and faculty safe from genuine incidents of harassment and vandalism, which are already punishable offenses.
The alternative is to capitulate to those who would eviscerate higher education for their own benefit.