News and updates

Cornell Community Letter on Free Expression and Policing

(The following was an open letter drafted by Cornell faculty, which the Cornell AAUP Chapter shared with our members)

November 22, 2023 (last updated)

Dear President Martha Pollack, Provost Michael Kotlikoff, Deputy Provost Avery August, Senior Associate Vice Provost Yael Levitte, Assistant Director Gabriela Vargas, and Chairman Kraig Kayser:

This is the year of “Free Expression at Cornell,” a university that also prides itself on its diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, with our President recently receiving a national diversity award. We are a university with a mission of “Any Person, Any Study.”

But here at Cornell we do not equally feel protected by the University, and we do not feel equally able to express ourselves. Most recently, we were horrified by the threats made to our Jewish community. We applaud the President for issuing a swift and forceful statement of condemnation. It is this kind of unwavering support that we hope to see for all vulnerable members of the campus community, especially Palestinian, Arab, Muslim and other BIPOC students, staff, and faculty.

In line with the ACLU’s call, we ask that you issue a public statement that focuses on condemning all acts of harassment and intimidation on campus and declares the value of all free speech, within “the limits of the law and the University’s anti-harassment policy”, so that we can return to a safe teaching, learning, and working environment. Moreover, we ask that you offer administrative protections against doxxing and implement community care alternatives instead of intensified policing, which has been a touchstone of your response. Free speech for all and a hate-free atmosphere are complementary values to the standing against anti-Semitism initiatives announced by President Pollack on November 1, 2023. 

These recent threats are a part of a larger climate of alienation, racism, harassment, intimidation, and doxxing on our campus, and part of wider attempts to divide oppressed peoples. We call on the President to condemn this climate of hate and to work proactively to restore the value of free speech and create conditions for furthering understanding. The Administration’s lack of an avowal of all of our experiences and rights to expression has left BIPOC and otherwise vulnerable members of our campus community feeling unseen and unsafe. 

We have been appalled by anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic posters and a truck vilifying an African American faculty member, and we feel bereft that this incident has gone unacknowledged by the administration. The President and Board of Trustees’ Chairman’s statements to the campus on October 16, 2023 and to Inside Higher Ed condemned the faculty member and gave cover to the subsequent doxxing. As the Cornell Chapter of the AAUP put it in their recent statement, the University’s announcement of an investigation into our colleague’s conduct was a mistake, and it “should have instead declared forthrightly that free speech for all people, on any issue, within ‘the limits of the law and the University’s anti-harassment policy,’ is a core value that the University will defend.”

The administration bears responsibility for the risk, scrutiny, and overall danger especially for faculty, staff, and students who are BIPOC, international, and otherwise marginalized. Collectively, related to our duties as faculty, staff, and students working on questions of domination and oppression, we have faced: international harassment campaigns, circulation of our personal addresses, unsolicited hate mail, threats to our families, calls for our firing, office vandalization, the donning of intimidating logos in our classes, photographing and videotaping of our activities on campus, screenshotting and circulating of our classroom communications, charges of reverse racism, threats of poor course evaluations, and an unwillingness to sponsor events on Palestine.

This hostile work environment has had a chilling effect on our research, teaching, and studying. The climate thwarts our educational mission which guarantees “any person, any study.” Many of us are now afraid to speak freely and have resorted to wearing masks to hide our identities on campus. Without adequate support, some of us have been forced to retreat from the community altogether. Doxxing, intimidation, and harassment are known to inflict mental health, economic, and social damage, often to family members and other innocent victims. Moreover, research shows that those from historically excluded and marginalized communities are more likely to be subject to racist intimidation and threats.

We want to be clear that doxxing and harassment is a collective problem. When one person is targeted, it has a ripple effect. As such, these practices require collective and structural, not individualized, attention and responses. The issue is not limited to those of us who study and teach Israel/Palestine, but also applies to teachers and students of the United States, Russia and Ukraine, China, Nagorno-Karabakh, and elsewhere, as well as colonialism, racism, casteism, militarism, empire, gender/sexuality, democracy/authoritarianism, and other topics related to domination and oppression. 

The actions from the University that we would like to see do not include increased policing, security and surveillance, which have been touchstones of the university’s response. University entities currently advise measures like CUPD screening of work email, installation of security cameras, and increased patrols and police presence. Increased surveillance and securitization restrict expression and exacerbate a climate of fear. These must not be the only responses: such measures can be discriminatory and not all communities are equally protected by or comfortable with law enforcement. Thus, in addition to public condemnation of all acts of intimidation, harassment, and doxxing, and a public reassurance of our equal rights to free expression, we would like to see the University invest in responses that emphasize community care and a robust defense of open and rigorous analysis. In particular, we urge the university to take measures including, but not limited to: 

–  Implementing and publicizing anti-harassment procedures, such as the resources compiled by library staff (https://cornellcolab.github.io/guides/harassment/)
– Funding for anti-doxxing and data privacy staff, consultations, and services such as DeleteMe
– Transparent and ethical data policies: disclosure of CUPD and security infrastructure budget and operations; non-purchase of predictive policing software with history of racial bias or investigative software that sells to ICE, building referendums on security cameras
–  Administrative Protections (e.g. remote teaching provisions)
–  A series of educational events on free expression to be organized by the AAUP

We need to see the university fulfill its commitments to freedom of speech, diversity, and inclusion, and to provide substantive expressions and guarantees of support and reassurance to all members of its community, as other university administrations have done. Here are helpful statements from the Administrations at Syracuse, Rutgers, and Columbia, which has also announced an anti-doxxing initiative.

Please reassure us that we are free to express ourselves without fear of retribution from the University so that we can continue researching, teaching, and making community with peace of mind, dignity, and safety.

Please also reassure us that you will ardently work to protect free speech, including critiques of the actions of any state’s human right violations, and will counter any attempts to conflate critique of the State of Israel with anti-Semitism, just as a critique of any state’s human rights violations cannot be considered a critique of a religious, ethnic, national, or any other identity.

Open letter on harassment

October 23, 2023

Dear President Pollack, Provost Kotlikoff, and Deputy Provost August,

We write to express our profound concern over the threat to academic freedom on campus currently. The University’s failure to forthrightly stand behind its commitment to academic freedom and free speech has contributed to a climate of intimidation, harassment, and censorship. We urge the administration to rectify the situation by issuing a statement that defends free speech and condemns harassment and violent threats (the statement by Syracuse University in September 2021 is a good example).   

In the last week, the situation has deteriorated considerably, and now extends well beyond the threats, professional and physical, against Professor Russell Rickford. Students and faculty are reluctant to go to classrooms and offices for fear of being photographed and being made the targets of international harassment campaigns. We have heard from faculty and students who have stopped engaging politically out of fear of retaliation, who are afraid to speak up in defense of a professor they love because they believe doing so publicly will lead to harassment and threats against their future employment. We have heard from faculty who have considered changing their lectures or discussion seminar topics, or replacing important but difficult readings with more muted, safe, and ‘uncontroversial’ texts. Others have considered canceling educational seminars out of fear of harassment or interference in its content. Some have begun to shy away from topics our students want to know and think more about, topics about which these colleagues are acknowledged experts. 

Currently this is about Israel/Palestine. But the issue is much larger. The teaching and study of China, of Russia and Ukraine, of democracy and authoritarianism, of race and racism, and countless other subjects will all be diminished if the faculty and students who teach and want to learn about these topics believe the University will not defend those rights.  

Academic freedom and free speech are the lifeblood of the university, the “indispensable condition” for learning. It cannot be sustained in an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. Departmental statements in defense of academic freedom and free speech are important but insufficient. The University made a mistake when it condemned Professor Rickford and announced an investigation into his conduct. It should have instead declared forthrightly that free speech for all people, on any issue, within “the limits of the law and the University’s anti-harassment policy,” is a core value that the University will defend. But mistakes can be corrected. What is needed is for the University to begin rectifying this mistake and to announce to the community that it will adhere to its stated principles. Academic freedom and free speech are not only to be defended when it is easy to do so. We urge the administration to publicly, positively, and unambiguously defend the academic freedom and free speech rights of all members of the Cornell community – faculty, students, staff – and their right to work and learn without fear of harassment. 

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Risa Lieberwitz, AAUP Chapter President

David Bateman, AAUP Chapter Vice President 

Ian Greer, AAUP Chapter Secretary-Treasurer
Darlene Evans, AAUP Executive Committee member
Suman Seth, AAUP Executive Committee member

Open letter of the Cornell AAUP executive committee

See below for a recent message sent from our Executive Committee to University Administration on the current climate at Cornell, sent on October 23, 2023:

Dear President Pollack, Provost Kotlikoff, and Deputy Provost August,

We write to express our profound concern over the threat to academic freedom on campus currently. The University’s failure to forthrightly stand behind its commitment to academic freedom and free speech has contributed to a climate of intimidation, harassment, and censorship. We urge the administration to rectify the situation by issuing a statement that defends free speech and condemns harassment and violent threats (the statement by Syracuse University in September 2021 is a good example).

In the last week, the situation has deteriorated considerably, and now extends well beyond the threats, professional and physical, against Professor Russell Rickford. Students and faculty are reluctant to go to classrooms and offices for fear of being photographed and being made the targets of international harassment campaigns. We have heard from faculty and students who have stopped engaging politically out of fear of retaliation, who are afraid to speak up in defense of a professor they love because they believe doing so publicly will lead to harassment and threats against their future employment. We have heard from faculty who have considered changing their lectures or discussion seminar topics, or replacing important but difficult readings with more muted, safe, and ‘uncontroversial’ texts. Others have considered canceling educational seminars out of fear of harassment or interference in its content. Some have begun to shy away from topics our students want to know and think more about, topics about which these colleagues are acknowledged experts.

Currently this is about Israel/Palestine. But the issue is much larger. The teaching and study of China, of Russia and Ukraine, of democracy and authoritarianism, of race and racism, and countless other subjects will all be diminished if the faculty and students who teach and want to learn about these topics believe the University will not defend those rights.

Academic freedom and free speech are the lifeblood of the university, the “indispensable condition” for learning. It cannot be sustained in an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. Departmental statements in defense of academic freedom and free speech are important but insufficient. The University made a mistake when it condemned Professor Rickford and announced an investigation into his conduct. It should have instead declared forthrightly that free speech for all people, on any issue, within “the limits of the law and the University’s anti-harassment policy,” is a core value that the University will defend. But mistakes can be corrected. What is needed is for the University to begin rectifying this mistake and to announce to the community that it will adhere to its stated principles. Academic freedom and free speech are not only to be defended when it is easy to do so. We urge the administration to publicly, positively, and unambiguously defend the academic freedom and free speech rights of all members of the Cornell community – faculty, students, staff – and their right to work and learn without fear of harassment.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Risa Lieberwitz, AAUP Chapter President

David Bateman, AAUP Chapter Vice President

Ian Greer, AAUP Chapter Secretary-Treasurer

Darlene Evans, AAUP Executive Committee member

Suman Seth, AAUP Executive Committee member

Cornell AAUP Chapter Statement on Cornell University’s Obligation to Protect Academic Freedom in Extramural Speech

(The Cornell AAUP Chapter has voted unanimously to endorse the “Cornell AAUP Chapter Statement on Cornell University’s Obligation to Protect Academic Freedom in Extramural Speech.”)

Dear President Pollack, Provost Kotlikoff, and Deputy Provost August,

We write to express our profound concern over the threat to academic freedom on campus currently. The University’s failure to forthrightly stand behind its commitment to academic freedom and free speech has contributed to a climate of intimidation, harassment, and censorship. We urge the administration to rectify the situation by issuing a statement that defends free speech and condemns harassment and violent threats (the statement by Syracuse University in September 2021 is a good example).   

In the last week, the situation has deteriorated considerably, and now extends well beyond the threats, professional and physical, against Professor Russell Rickford. Students and faculty are reluctant to go to classrooms and offices for fear of being photographed and being made the targets of international harassment campaigns. We have heard from faculty and students who have stopped engaging politically out of fear of retaliation, who are afraid to speak up in defense of a professor they love because they believe doing so publicly will lead to harassment and threats against their future employment. We have heard from faculty who have considered changing their lectures or discussion seminar topics, or replacing important but difficult readings with more muted, safe, and ‘uncontroversial’ texts. Others have considered canceling educational seminars out of fear of harassment or interference in its content. Some have begun to shy away from topics our students want to know and think more about, topics about which these colleagues are acknowledged experts. 

Currently this is about Israel/Palestine. But the issue is much larger. The teaching and study of China, of Russia and Ukraine, of democracy and authoritarianism, of race and racism, and countless other subjects will all be diminished if the faculty and students who teach and want to learn about these topics believe the University will not defend those rights.  

Academic freedom and free speech are the lifeblood of the university, the “indispensable condition” for learning. It cannot be sustained in an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. Departmental statements in defense of academic freedom and free speech are important but insufficient. The University made a mistake when it condemned Professor Rickford and announced an investigation into his conduct. It should have instead declared forthrightly that free speech for all people, on any issue, within “the limits of the law and the University’s anti-harassment policy,” is a core value that the University will defend. But mistakes can be corrected. What is needed is for the University to begin rectifying this mistake and to announce to the community that it will adhere to its stated principles. Academic freedom and free speech are not only to be defended when it is easy to do so. We urge the administration to publicly, positively, and unambiguously defend the academic freedom and free speech rights of all members of the Cornell community – faculty, students, staff – and their right to work and learn without fear of harassment. 

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Risa Lieberwitz, AAUP Chapter President

David Bateman, AAUP Chapter Vice President 

Ian Greer, AAUP Chapter Secretary-Treasurer

Darlene Evans, AAUP Executive Committee member

Suman Seth, AAUP Executive Committee member

Cornell University Chapter of the AAUP Statement in Support of Cornell Graduate Employees’ Rights to Unionize

On September 29, 2023, the Cornell Graduate Students Union, affiliated with the United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (CGSU-UE) filed a petition for an election with the National Labor Relations Board. The Cornell University Chapter of the AAUP stands in strong support of the Cornell graduate worker rights to unionize and engage in collective bargaining about their wages, benefits, hours, and all terms and conditions of employment. The AAUP’s Statement on Collective Bargaining “supports the right of faculty, other academic professionals, and graduate students to form unions” and “promotes collective bargaining to reinforce and secure the principles of academic freedom and tenure, fair workplace procedures, and the economic security of the profession.”

The Cornell administration has stated, “We respect the right of students to unionize if they choose to do so.” Yet, the Cornell administration refused the CGSU-UE’s request that Cornell voluntarily recognize the union based on the strong evidence of majority support through union authorization cards signed by Cornell graduate employees. To show their respect for employees’ choices, the Cornell administration should voluntarily recognize the CGSU-UE as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Cornell graduate employees. We emphasize, as well, that Cornell must show its respect for graduate employees in all their statements and actions in relation to the upcoming union election. The Cornell administration should not only refrain from any interference with graduate employees’ rights to unionize, but it should refrain from making any statements about its views about unionization. As the AAUP Statement on Collective Bargaining states: “Trustees and administrators should maintain neutrality and allow academic workers to determine for themselves whether they would like to be represented by a union.”