Re: “Whose Foot” (opinion, Oct. 29)
On Oct. 29, Interim President Kotlikoff wrote, in a column for The Sun, that “no student at Cornell has been punished for expressing their beliefs.” My experience proves otherwise. Last semester, I was suspended and banned from campus for a semester, not for any disruptive action, but for a story on my private Instagram account.
This story, which included the phrase “Zionists must die,” was not directed at specific individuals, nor was it a call to action. It was a general expression, protected as free speech. That standard is well-settled; one Cornell Law professor wrote that the legality of my statement “was not a close case.” Yet, Cornell’s administration charged me with assault and endangerment, fully suspending me for four months. Eventually, a hearing panel made up of students, faculty and staff reasoned that my speech was rhetorical hyperbole and found me not responsible.
During my pre-hearing suspension, Cornell’s administration denied that they were punishing me for protected free expression. Kotlikoff, then the provost, did not address my appeal’s free expression argument, calling it not “central to the appeal.” In my hearing, an administrative hearing chair said I could not ask an expert witness about the legal boundaries of free speech because my case was “not about free expression.” They deemed it irrelevant that free and open inquiry and expression is a core value listed at the top of the Student Code of Conduct. Only an independent hearing panel finally recognized that my speech did not violate the Code.
As a Native American student, this suspension represented a troubling double standard. In defending his stance on student discipline, Kotlikoff claims that Cornell is committed to protecting free speech. However, by refusing my appeal and denying my right to voice my perspectives, the administration circumvented its policies to suppress politically inconvenient speech. University administrations committed to free speech do not protect some offensive viewpoints while cracking down on others.
The selective enforcement is evident. When I reported messages from Cornell students saying things like “Native Americans need to die” or “Native Americans are savage,” Cornell took no action. The University shows leniency when speech targets oppressed groups but punishes minority voices challenging powerful ideologies. Selectively penalizing students for expressing certain viewpoints, particularly through non-public channels like a private Instagram account, is not only an infringement on free expression but an act of censorship. This reflects an ongoing campaign to silence criticism of genocide and white supremacy, shutting down speech against Zionism and Israel’s genocide in Palestine while protecting hate speech targeting those who stand against such injustices.
Kotlikoff fails to acknowledge his role in censoring dissent, and by claiming that Cornell does not punish students for expressing themselves, he disregards experiences like mine. If Cornell is to remain a place where ideas can be freely exchanged, it must allow for a diversity of perspectives without fear of selective censorship. Only by committing to impartiality in its disciplinary approach can Cornell uphold free expression and foster a community of dialogue.
— Maria Lima Valdez ’25
The Cornell Daily Sun is interested in publishing a broad and diverse set of content from the Cornell and greater Ithaca community. We want to hear what you have to say about this topic or any of our pieces. Here are some guidelines on how to submit. And here’s our email: [email protected].