“…[P]residents should consider whether the impact on their campus is both significant and distinct from the impact on society-at-large. Examples include campus free speech, affirmative action, and certain visa and immigration policies,” they continued.
“When the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade, we believe it was entirely appropriate for presidents to clarify for their communities what reproductive health services would still be available in the aftermath of the decision.”
They conclude their essay with a quote from the University of Chicago’s Kalven Committee: “…[T]he upside of an institution’s neutrality, and it is by no means inconsiderable, is ‘the fullest freedom for its faculty and students as individuals to participate in political action and social protest.’”
