It is your right to be angry. It is your right to take a stand, and it is your right to protest. It is your right to assemble outside a building and scream at its occupants. It is your right to pitch tents, erect walls, paint, or plaster posters all over campus. But somewhere along the way we have forgotten that freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. It is not your right to do anything you want.
A petition entitled “Uphold Free Speech: Demand Vanderbilt University Revoke Penalties” was posted to Roadmap, the Vanderbilt Student Government communications portal this past Easter. It received 651 signatures at the time of writing, representing just short of 10% of Vanderbilt’s undergraduate population. This is significant, echoing wider demands on campus to separate the students who broke into Kirkland Hall from the sanctions applied to them by the university. These sanctions include interim suspension from all campus amenities for 25 of the 27 students who entered Kirkland Hall, and criminal charges for four more. This left said students without access to any university housing or food for several days as they navigated the student accountability process. Now, three weeks later, the conflict between the administration and protesters drags on. Three students expelled from the school have hired lawyers of their own. Members of Vanderbilt Divest Coalition (VDC) have maintained their tents in front of Kirkland Hall and plan to remain there for weeks. Posters in front of Rand declare that Vanderbilt is sending your tuition money off to build Israeli bombs. Every day there is a new scandal. Every day we stray further from the point.
The strange thing is that Vanderbilt has been patient. No tents have been disturbed. No posters have been removed. Administration made no motion to interrupt the recent walkout, or the demonstrations held in front of Kirkland itself. Protestors have loudly, yet peacefully, made themselves heard for over a month, all of which is neatly documented on VDC’s Instagram account. Even when angry students demonstrated at Anchor Day, they were allowed to continue as they pleased. If the campus is truly “#1 in student suppression,” as one poster claimed, then wouldn’t all of this have been stopped weeks ago?
Pomona College arrested 20 students for storming their chancellor’s office a week ago, and Washington University has come under fire for similar issues. The presidents of the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard both resigned following their testimonies before the House Workforce Committee. Columbia University will soon send their president to a similar hearing. The University of Southern California even cancelled their Valedictorian’s speech after concerns that it would contain inflammatory pro-Palestinian material.
In fact, Vanderbilt has a history of protests entering Kirkland Hall. In 2015 students marched to have various racially charged aspects of campus revised, including the name of “Confederate Memorial Hall” on Commons. The matter was addressed promptly, and no university policies were violated. Previous chancellors even reportedly gave snacks to protestors who visited politely. The key is that the building was open and unlocked, students were allowed inside, and nobody remained on site after closing. It was a perfect demonstration of peaceful protest, and in many ways a generous act by the Vanderbilt Administration. We must remember that as a private university, they are not bound in any way by the First Amendment. Anything they choose to allow is technically a bonus, and they have allowed near constant peaceful protest here for weeks.
What happened on the 26th was not this. In security footage, students broke through locked doors and pushed an officer aside. They set up camp in an atrium near the elevators and sat in place for hours. They refused to leave the building to eat or use the bathroom. Bottles of increasingly dehydrated urine piled up against a wall. And then they whined about it. They acted as if they were trapped inside, all the while free to get up and leave as some eventually did. They were not “starved” or “subjected to inhumane conditions.” These students broke into a building and acted surprised that they were not welcomed with snacks and open arms.
Now they beg for leniency or even immunity. They shout that they are oppressed as they begin to face the consequences of their actions. Have they forgotten that they paid to be here? Have they forgotten the contract they signed?
Let us not mince words, these students are not heroes or martyrs. They claim that a true protest seeks to disrupt and break rules, but they are enraged when these rules are enforced. The petition calls for “free speech” and in the same sentence says “revoke penalties.” If you believe that they should all be pardoned, ask yourself this: do you believe in freedom of speech, or do you believe in freedom from accountability?
