In just one week, Haverford College faced two very different challenges involving free expression. The first involved religion professor Guangtian Ha, who was arrested on allegations of cyberstalking and threatening a Jewish colleague. If substantiated, the allegations against Ha could involve expression that falls outside constitutional protection. The First Amendment protects a great deal of expression that is offensive, hateful, or deeply upsetting. But it doesn’t cover everything. True threats, for example, fall outside its protection, as do certain other types of expression such as incitement or defamation.
The second involved a student-organized “Art Campaign in Solidarity with Palestine,” scheduled for Oct. 7, the anniversary of the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Citing safety concerns, President Wendy Raymond canceled the event. This drew criticism from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights nonprofit, and prompted FIRE to reach out to school officials and raise concerns with Haverford about the cancellation. While colleges have a duty to ensure campus safety, that responsibility must not be used by administrators as a blank check to cancel controversial events. Rather, objective evidence should lead administrators’ assessment of whether there is a credible, specific threat of violence or a serious disruption. And before taking such drastic measures, other more reasonable routes — such as separating protesters and attendees — should be considered.
