In two books authored this fall, University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 and history professor Fara Dabhoiwala offer two sharply diverging views on how universities should navigate free speech.
Eisgruber’s book, “Terms of Respect: How Colleges Get Free Speech Right,” argues that universities have managed to foster real dialogue and engagement among students and faculty — or at least more than they are given credit for in the popular discourse. Dhabiowala’s “What is Free Speech? The History of a Dangerous Idea” offers a historical account of the concept of free speech beginning in the 18th century, ultimately taking issue with the term “free speech” as depicting a totally open marketplace of ideas.
“[Eisgruber and I] probably disagree quite profoundly about the value trade-offs inherent in the current modern First Amendment jurisprudence of the Supreme Court,” Dabhoiwala said in an interview with The Daily Princetonian. “Free speech is essentially a subjective, weaponized slogan.”
Eisgruber’s book touches on a wide range of topics, including free speech jurisprudence, the incentives of social media and cancel culture, and how students should think about balancing civility and frank exchange — generally offering solutions for additional speech, rather than limiting a particular perspective.
“Simply put, the remedy for bad speech is more speech, not censorship or punishment,” Eisgruber wrote in the book’s second chapter.
But in his book — published around two months before Eisgruber’s — Dabhoiwala pushed back on the idea that more speech was a complete remedy. Effective policy “does mean looking beyond the complacent First Amendment platitude that the only possible response even to truly injurious utterances is simply to counter them with more speech,” he wrote.
Dabhoiwala was critical of Nassau Hall’s response to the 2024 pro-Palestine protests on campus, which included an encampment that lasted 19 days and an occupation of Clio Hall. “Speaking personally, I was really very sad and disappointed by the way that the university leadership dealt with protests about Gaza and pro-Palestinian political statements right from the outset,” he said.
On April 24, the day before the encampment started, Vice President for Campus Life Rochelle Calhoun sent a campus-wide email stating that anyone participating in an “encampment, occupation, or other unlawful disruptive conduct who refuses to stop after a warning will be arrested and immediately barred from campus.” Two graduate students were arrested on the morning of April 25 for pitching tents in McCosh courtyard.
“A little bit more talking, a little bit less, you know, administrative clap-down would have been a good thing,” Dabhoiwala said.
Eisgruber noted in the book that student-to-student communication might be the most effective to promote civility. He pointed to the use of dialogue between Princeton students about the phrase “globalize the intifada,” as an example of the power of an open speech environment. “At Princeton, protestors stopped using ‘intifada’ after discussing the term with sympathetic peers who identified with their cause but not their rhetoric,” he wrote.
During the encampment, after a series of conversations between participants, organizers made a verbal announcement that protestors should no longer use the term “intifada,” according to an Opinion piece published during the encampment.
Eisgruber and Dabhoiwala also differed in their perspectives on viewpoint diversity among professors on campus.
In the final chapter of his book, Eisgruber outlined nine recommendations for universities to avoid free speech crises, including, “Be visibly open to conservative viewpoints.”
“There are many ways to do that — for example, by disavowing politically loaded practices like mandatory diversity statements for job candidates; by including references to ‘viewpoint’ when discussing the university’s commitment to diversity and inclusivity; by creating initiatives that are congenial to conservatives … or by seizing appropriate opportunities to praise or honor prominent conservative faculty members on one’s own campus,” he wrote.
The James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, directed by politics professor Robert George, offers a space and training ground for conservative voices and scholars on campus.
“To have a robust exchange of ideas, you need to have people that have different opinions,” George said in an October webinar on the issues facing higher education hosted by Princetonians for Free Speech. “You need people who actually disagree about things; you need not only liberals but conservatives.”
Dabhoiwala does not see viewpoint diversity as a compelling interest in faculty hiring practices. He argued that, for example, hiring climate change deniers into Princeton’s Program for Environmental Studies would contribute to faculty viewpoint diversity, but decrease the overall quality of the institution.
“I think these assertions are often politically motivated,” said Dabhoiwala. “They are cudgels with which to beat universities in a political landscape that is extremely hostile and partisan now.”
The speech debate also extends to cultivating viewpoint diversity among students. A recent book by Professor Frances Lee — “In Covid’s Wake: How Our Politics Failed Us” — argued that a more open environment is necessary for students to avoid self-censorship, especially in light of a post-pandemic rise in polarization.
In an interview with the ‘Prince,’ Lee referenced surveys of Princeton students which found that “conservative students self-censor or feel that it’s not a welcoming environment for them to express their views.” In responses to a University survey, 36 percent of students identifying as conservative disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “I feel that I can voice my true opinions on controversial topics without fear of being unfairly judged,” compared to 20 percent of liberal students.
School of Public and International Affairs professor Udi Ofer said he also sees this rise in self-censorship in the broader student population, not just conservatives.
“We’re also seeing, I fear, student behavior begin to change and become less embracing of a vibrant campus speech,” he said. Ofer referenced a 2024 report by the Knight Foundation which found a decrease in the number of students who believe their right to speech was secure, driven largely by liberal students.
The Trump administration’s recent crackdowns on pro-Palestine protestors and revocation of international visas have made students at Princeton and at universities across the country concerned with the state of free expression. In a June executive order, the White House said that visas could be revoked for any speech that might “threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes.”
Ofer argued that this executive order harshly restricts the free speech rights of international students. “This is an area of law where I have my normative principles, and I believe that the First Amendment applies to non-citizens as well,” he said.
Despite having different perspectives on many aspects of free speech policy, Dabhoiwala, Eisgruber, and other faculty members largely agree that universities, not the government, are key in promoting civil discussion.
“[The university] remains the best example we have of a speech model that has as its overriding purpose the advancement of truth about hard questions — and that has been proven to work,” Dabhoiwala wrote.
“At their best, colleges and universities model forms of discourse that are at once unfettered and inclusive,” Eisgruber wrote. “That kind of engagement is essential not only on America’s campuses but also in a country whose citizens must reestablish faith in their civic institutions and in one another at a time when partisan trends and communication technologies conspire to pull them apart.”
Cynthia Torres is an associate News editor, and archives contributor. She is from New Bedford, Massachusetts and typically covers University administration. She can be reached at ct3968[at]princeton.edu.
Gray Collins is a News contributor for the ‘Prince.’ He is from Villanova, Penn. and can be reached at gc7410@princeton.edu.
Please send corrections to corrections[at]dailyprincetonian.com.
Read More
Tigers lose national championship 2–1 in sudden death to reigning champion Northwestern
Emilia ReayAfter leading 1–0 heading into the fourth quarter, the Tigers fell in double overtime to the defending champion Northwestern Wildcats in an all-time classic.
After leading 1–0 heading into the fourth quarter, the Tigers fell in double overtime to the defending champion Northwestern Wildcats in an all-time classic.
Men’s soccer upset by Duke in heartbreaker NCAA second round
Xavier LatimerNo. 3 men’s soccer fell 2–1 to Duke in the second round the NCAA Tournament, giving up two second-half goals after taking a 1–0 lead in the first.
No. 3 men’s soccer fell 2–1 to Duke in the second round the NCAA Tournament, giving up two second-half goals after taking a 1–0 lead in the first.
USG evaluates status of three working groups
Haeon Lee and Luke GrippoUSG evaluates the status of three working groups: the Civil Liberties group, a pilot of a student-administrator working group on campus expansion, and the Academics Life group.
USG evaluates the status of three working groups: the Civil Liberties group, a pilot of a student-administrator working group on campus expansion, and the Academics Life group.