LIEBERWITZ | Cornell University Has an Obligation to Protect Academic Freedom in Extramural Speech

There are many areas of social, economic and political controversies that faculty may address in exercising their academic freedom, but perhaps none so controversial as those dealing with Israel and Palestine. The University administration should stand up for faculty who exercise their academic freedom, even in the face of pressure from legislators, trustees, donors, students or alumni to sanction faculty for their speech.

JOKHAI | The Discussion on Palestine Challenges Free Speech on Cornell’s Campus

This idea of perpetual discussion being a tool of oppression towards Palestinians was certainly not directed at anything specific. Like all discussions regarding human rights and their violations, the conversation is not localized, but global, affecting all people. The point struck incredibly close to home for me. Earlier in 2021, the Palestinian struggle gained global notoriety due to the eviction of Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah, leading to a rally of Cornellians sympathetic to the cause, organized by Prof. Eric Cheyfitz and members of Students for Justice in Palestine, at which others and I gave speeches. Cornell’s response to our voices left much to be desired. 

C.U. Policies Could Limit Free Speech

Student activism is a long-standing tradition at Cornell, and the University’s creed pledges full and equal protection of students’ rights; but there is a devil in the details.
Cornell’s policies on harassment, tolerance, respect and civility contain so-called speech codes — “Trojan horses” embedded within University guidelines that limit the scope of free speech on campus. [img_assist|nid=37744|title=Freedom speech|desc=Will Creeley, director of legal and public advocacy for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, speaks in Goldwin Smith Hall yesterday.|link=node|align=left|width=336|height=233]

Pointless Freedom of Speech Boundaries

At some point, we have all found pleasure in the crude humor of comedies or sitcoms, but the FCC has decided that we should have this privilege limited. While profanity has become an integrated part of everyday life, most agree that there are situations where this form of freedom of speech is inappropriate. However, limiting the ability of broadcasters to air profanity on television enters into dangerous territory, which is likely to bring protest from those who value the American tradition of free speech.