Institutional Neutrality
The “You Decide” section of Chapter 5 provides examples of how universities responded to free speech controversies following Hamas’s attack on Israel and Israel’s retaliation against Gaza, and ends with a question: Should universities and colleges adopt a policy of institutional neutrality? The material below provides additional background material on the meaning of institutional neutrality, as well as arguments for and against it.
STATEMENTS ON INSTITUTIONAL NEUTRALITY
George W. Beadle | University of Chicago | 11/11/67 (Document)
“Kalven Committee: Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action”
University of Chicago | 11/11/67 (Document)
“University of Chicago: Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression”
COMMENTARY IN SUPPORT OF (SOME VERSION OF) INSTITUTIONAL NEUTRALITY
Daniel Diermeier | Forbes | 11/20/24 (Article)
“Institutional Neutrality: A Guide for the Perplexed”
Harvard University | 05/24 (Article)
“Harvard University: Report on Institutional Voice in the University”
Harvard University (Document)
“Harvard University Institutional Voice Principles: Frequently Asked Questions”
COMMENTARY IN SUPPORT OF OTHER APPROACHES
Christopher L. Eisgruber | Princeton Alumni Weekly | 11/07/22 (Article)
“Princeton’s Tradition of Institutional Restraint”
Mohan Setty-Charity | The Daily Princetonian | 03/07/23 (Article)
“Stick with Institutional Restraint, not Institutional Neutrality”
Robert Post (Article)
“The Kalven Report, Institutional Neutrality, and Academic Freedom”