In recent days, I’ve heard a wide-range of views from colleagues about the protests in libraries across campus, and I want to take a moment in my dean’s business today to provide some clarity – about our rules and their purpose, about what happened, and about my responsibilities.
Let me start by talking about the policy at issue.
The prohibition against protests in libraries is part of the University-wide Statement on Rights and Responsibilities (the USRR). This University policy has been in place for more than 50 years. It was first adopted in 1970 and defines the rights and duties we share as members of an academic community, ensuring that Harvard’s dual commitment to free expression and mutual respect is honored, regardless of the specific subjects of debate and disagreement.
Fundamentally, the USRR is a guarantee of freedom of speech—including the right to protest and dissent—as integral to the values of our University. Balancing these rights and responsibilities enable the University to fulfill our central mission of “learning, teaching, research and scholarship.”
In January, in response to calls for clarification from faculty and students, the academic leadership of the University – myself included – provided information about how the guarantees and limitations regarding protest and dissent found in the USRR apply in specific settings. These are guidelines for the time, place, and manner of protest and dissent.
Among the guidance outlined in that January letter was that protests are not ordinarily permitted in libraries or other spaces designated for study, quiet reflection, and small group discussion. The goal was to protect “the right of students to learn and study and to make a residential campus their home; the right of faculty and instructors to teach, research, and mentor; and the right of staff to do the vital work necessary for the University to fulfill its mission.”
The prohibition on protests in the library is not a mechanism to police individual expression, such as personal stickers on laptops, particular clothing, or, importantly, the ideas that are expressed. Let me say that even more clearly. Our policies protect your rights to express your individual views. Those are individual acts of expression and not at issue here.
Instead, the policy prohibits protest inside the library in order to safeguard the academic purpose of these spaces for all patrons. The policy recognizes that we owe it to our students to protect some spaces – like libraries – for the reflection and study that are so closely tied to our academic mission. Students rely upon the library as a refuge for quiet reflection – to study for their midterms, write their final paper, or engage with library material. It is important that these academic spaces remain inclusive for all students.
Now I’m going to describe briefly the circumstances of the protests that have happened in Widener Library. One thing I heard last Spring was that many didn’t feel like they knew what was happening. So here I want to make sure we have a shared understanding of the events.
Three protests have been held at Widener library this term. These were organized events, and in two instances were publicized in advance. In one instance, organizers advertised the event broadly on social media and another wrote directly to the librarian to alert her to their intentions to organize. These events have included between 30 and 100 participants. Participants have arrived as a group, used placards or other signs, and have been accompanied by photographers and often individuals filming.
These are events with a start and end point, with a clear set of participants, and a clear message. They are not simply individuals reading. That’s clear to those participating, to other library patrons, and to the library staff.
Importantly, individuals were warned – sometimes more than once – before entering the library that protesting/organizing/demonstrating in the fashion would be breaking University rules and of possible consequences.
The administrative sanctions that participants received prohibited them from entering Widener Library for two weeks but were consciously structured to not impede academic work – for example, any library materials needed would be provided and exceptions for classes that took place in Widener would be made.
I understand that there is a broad set of perspectives on these issues. Since the late summer, I have been talking with colleagues across our community – in small groups, Zoom calls, and one-on-on meetings, as well as holding discussions in Faculty Council. While there is consensus that having time/place/manner guidelines is important, what is clear is that these issues are complex, and reasonable people can disagree on where to draw the line.
But as FAS Dean, I have a responsibility to uphold the balance of rights and responsibilities that enables all of us to pursue the academic activities we joined this community to pursue. Guidelines for the time, place, and manner of protest are a critical tool in upholding that balance and creating an ordered academic environment on which our mission relies.
Protests are a normal part of university life — and so are rules to govern the times and places they occur. Our current rules clearly state that libraries are not the place for organized group demonstrations. I fully support Martha Whitehead in her implementation of this university policy.
More broadly, our policies strongly protect the right to free expression in our community. That’s true for students, and for faculty.
Harvard policies provide ample other places where protests are permitted. For example, last month, a group of faculty protested outside of Widener, consistent with time/place/manner, and without consequence or interference.
Faculty in our University have a strong voice and many ways to express their views – from meeting with leadership and talking to colleagues, to writing editorials, to organizing or participating in panel discussions, to participating in protests in many spaces across our campus.
These policies, in fact, protect your right to do so. In upholding them, we will continue to protect these rights, recognizing in so doing that we also protect the environment in which we pursue our academic mission.
Hopi Hoekstra
Edgerley Family Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences
C. Y. Chan Professor of Arts and Sciences
Xiaomeng Tong and Yu Chen Professor of Life Sciences