New York University (NYU) has been the center of attention following a series of recent campus speech controversies. This has been made worse by the university’s recent change in student conduct policy. In August, NYU changed its guidelines to label terms such as “Zionist” as forms of discriminatory speech. This amendment sparked a national controversy over free speech and the right to discuss controversial topics in the classroom.
On March 8, NYU administration pushed back when pediatric emergency physician Dr. Joanne Liu publicly. This occurred only hours before she was to give a keynote address decrying USAID cuts and the emerging humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Dr. Liu’s cherry-picking wouldn’t go largely unchallenged — even by education experts at the same university. She proposed that a few of the slides were antisemitic in nature. Soon afterward, NYU called off the talk, claiming it was “anti-governmental” for being critical of U.S. foreign policy.
This incident is not isolated. In December, NYU declared tenured professors Andrew Ross and Sonya Posmentier “personae non gratae” after they participated in a sit-in at the university library advocating for divestment from companies benefiting from Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Both professors were hit with no trespass restrictions prohibiting them from entering certain university-controlled properties.
The updated conduct guidelines stipulate that any speech violating NYU’s nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policy targeting Jewish or Israeli individuals applies to Zionists. Critics argue that the university’s policies have escalated suppression of anti-war discourse, allegedly under pressure from donors, politicians, and pro-Israel organizations.
During a recent graduation ceremony, Logan Rozos, an undergraduate from NYU’s Gallatin School of Individualized Study, delivered a commencement speech condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza. His statements drew a mixed response from the audience, with some attendees booing him and others cheering his call for accountability. Of course, Rozos made it clear throughout his talk that we should be committed to moral and political values.
“I’ve been freaking out a lot about this speech, honestly, and as I search my heart today in addressing you, all my moral and political commitments guide me to say that the only thing that is appropriate to say in this time and…” – Logan Rozos
Rozos spoke passionately about the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. He stated that the genocide occurring there is politically and militarily backed by the United States. In doing so, he said, he hoped to give voice to the moral injury that many were experiencing because of the violence.
“The genocide currently occurring is supported politically and militarily by the United States, is paid for by our tax dollars and has been livestreamed to our phones for the past 18 months. And that I do not wish to speak only to my own politics today, but to speak for all people of conscience, and all people who feel the moral injury of this atrocity.” – Logan Rozos
As of Thursday morning, Rozos’s profile had disappeared from NYU Gallatin’s website. Any visitors who searched for it were greeted to a “Page or File Not Found” message. This drastic action has prompted a national discussion about the dangers to academic freedom and the chilling effects of speech codes at educational institutions.
After Rozos’s remarks came under fire, NYU released a statement doubling down on its condemnation of his comments.
“He lied about the speech he was going to deliver and violated the commitment he made to comply with our rules. The university is withholding his diploma while we pursue disciplinary actions. NYU is deeply sorry that the audience was subjected to these remarks and that this moment was stolen by someone who abused a privilege that was conferred upon him,” – NYU Spokesperson John Beckman
These recent developments at NYU are symptomatic of nationwide tensions on college campuses when it comes to open discussions about Palestine and Israel. Critics argue that students are increasingly facing censorship when expressing dissenting views on U.S. foreign policy and its impacts on global conflicts.