Christopher L. Eisgruber

That is how you constitute your departments, how you choose your students, and presumably how it is you choose your faculty.

That is how you constitute your departments, how you choose your students, and presumably how it is you choose your faculty.

Yeah, Rachel, so let's start with this, right? Standing against anti-Semitism is a fundamental responsibility for any university president and for any university. It's something where universities ought to be working in partnership with the government.

Yeah, Rachel, so let's start with this, right? Standing against anti-Semitism is a fundamental responsibility for any university president and for any university. It's something where universities ought to be working in partnership with the government.

And if the government has concerns about anti-Semitism or any other form of hate on a college campus, it is legitimate for the government to go in pursuant to the laws that exist prohibiting that.

And if the government has concerns about anti-Semitism or any other form of hate on a college campus, it is legitimate for the government to go in pursuant to the laws that exist prohibiting that.

Title IX, Title VI, right? And to come in to require the university to take steps. But that's the right way to proceed. In that kind of investigation, as in any other kind of investigation, the government should be observing the due process that our law provides. They should be allowing universities to respond and offer their side of the story.

Title IX, Title VI, right? And to come in to require the university to take steps. But that's the right way to proceed. In that kind of investigation, as in any other kind of investigation, the government should be observing the due process that our law provides. They should be allowing universities to respond and offer their side of the story.

And then they should be putting in place, if they find that there are violations, appropriate remedies that are tailored to the violations and to the law. I think the problem with what happened at Columbia was that due process was not observed. The threats were made to funding without any real investigation or without any opportunity for Columbia to respond.

And then they should be putting in place, if they find that there are violations, appropriate remedies that are tailored to the violations and to the law. I think the problem with what happened at Columbia was that due process was not observed. The threats were made to funding without any real investigation or without any opportunity for Columbia to respond.

And then they were done in ways that encroached on these extraordinarily important principles of academic freedom. From my own standpoint, as I look at Colombia, I would say it's clear there were some serious problems with anti-Semitism on that campus. I also believe it's clear that Colombia was taking steps that they should be taking in order to address anti-Semitism.

And then they were done in ways that encroached on these extraordinarily important principles of academic freedom. From my own standpoint, as I look at Colombia, I would say it's clear there were some serious problems with anti-Semitism on that campus. I also believe it's clear that Colombia was taking steps that they should be taking in order to address anti-Semitism.

If the government didn't think they were doing enough, that's a perfectly appropriate thing for the government to be involved in. But again... respecting the norms of due process that are fundamental to our law and fundamental to our country, rather than doing this in some way that just comes in and says, hey, we're taking your funds, and now we want you to make these other kinds of changes.

If the government didn't think they were doing enough, that's a perfectly appropriate thing for the government to be involved in. But again... respecting the norms of due process that are fundamental to our law and fundamental to our country, rather than doing this in some way that just comes in and says, hey, we're taking your funds, and now we want you to make these other kinds of changes.

So I decided to write the op-ed because I do think there's a very fundamental threat here right now with two dimensions to it, to America's research universities, that anybody who cares about the strength of this country, our economy, our prosperity, our security, our health should be worried about.

So I decided to write the op-ed because I do think there's a very fundamental threat here right now with two dimensions to it, to America's research universities, that anybody who cares about the strength of this country, our economy, our prosperity, our security, our health should be worried about.

And one of those is the threat to this compact between the government and our universities that has produced research that's made a difference in the life of every American.

And one of those is the threat to this compact between the government and our universities that has produced research that's made a difference in the life of every American.

The reason I wrote when I did, when the threats were made to Colombia, is that there's an even more fundamental threat when the government starts intruding on academic freedom. It basically says there are departments at Colombia that seem to be saying things that we don't like. We're going to use this funding as a mechanism to try to change what it is Colombia does. is doing in that respect.

The reason I wrote when I did, when the threats were made to Colombia, is that there's an even more fundamental threat when the government starts intruding on academic freedom. It basically says there are departments at Colombia that seem to be saying things that we don't like. We're going to use this funding as a mechanism to try to change what it is Colombia does. is doing in that respect.