Table of Contents
On the front lines of the fight for free speech at Yale

This article appeared in .
Coincidences can be spooky. Last week, I showed up at Yale University in the middle of a campus crisisāand got drawn into it myself.
I was visiting to give a long-planned lecture on campus free speech. When I showed up, students were in an uproar over an email sent by one of the heads of the very dormitory where I was scheduled to speak.
Enter Erika Christakis, lecturer and associate master of Yaleās Silliman College (for non-Yalies, a dormitory). Erika is open-minded and a consistent critic of groupthink. When Yaleās Intercultural Affairs Committee sent an urging students to be sensitive in their choice of Halloween costumes, Erika sent out a thoughtful asking if such e-mails were in tension with studentsā right to autonomy and expression.
Readers may not realize that Halloween has become a season of campus controversy. For years, college administrators have been issuing stern warnings to students not to wear āoffensiveā costumes. Iād always assumed students were privately rolling their eyes at these often overbearing instructions from authority figures on how to dress.
But last Thursday I watched dozens of angry students surround Erikaās husband, Nicholas Christakis, in Sillimanās central courtyard to demand he apologize for Erikaās perfectly reasonable e-mail. Nicholas is a Yale professor and the master of Silliman College. Iāve witnessed some intense campus disputes during my 14 years fighting for free speech, but never anything like this.
I some of the confrontation, knowing that the easiest way for Nicholas to be fired would be for a student to claim that he flew off the handle. But he didnāt. Instead, Nicholas addressed the crowd for more than an hour, even after it became clear that nothing short of begging for forgiveness would satisfy them.
As Nicholas vigorously but respectfully defended the principles of free expression, students cried, shouted, and cursed at him. One even demanded his resignation.
And then I found myself part of the story.
Another coincidenceāthe program had just come out with an that revealed deeply troubling student attitudes about free speech. Mostly notably, over half of students polled favor speech codes that restrict free speech on campus.
When I described just how fierce the studentsā reaction to Erikaās e-mail had been, the audience seemed skeptical, so for emphasis I said, āYou would think that given the reaction to what she had written that she had actually wiped out an Indian village.ā
Shortly after, I paused when I heard commotion on the other side of the room: a student appeared to respond to my comments and began putting up posters. I couldnāt make out much of what he said as he fought with the security guard who asked him to leave (the student was not registered for the event), but I agreed he could post the posters and attempted to continue my speech.
As the guard struggled to lead him to the exit, the student yelled, āYou people speak like you donāt know the history of the country you pretend to love! And you talk about burning Indian villages, which gets a lot of laughs!ā
Word of my āoffensiveā comment spread quickly. Over 100 students gathered to protest the event, chanting and holding signs reading āGenocide is not a joke.ā
One of the event attendees reported to the Yale Daily News that he was .
The point of my dark quip was to illustrate that students were reacting to Christakisās e-mail as if she had committed some unspeakable evil, rejecting context, and displaying a burning desire to be offended and censor.
Ironically, in making that point, I caused students to do it all over again and make my point for me.
But the reaction to my comment is a sideshowāthe focus should remain on defending Erika and Nicholas Christakisās free speech rights. In todayās campus climate, when professors find themselves on the āwrongā side of the culture war, even those with tenure can find their jobs in jeopardy.
I have seen time and again university administrations press faculty to resign for their controversial expression. The university usually tries to make the resignation look like it was the professorās own decision. If this were to happen at Yale, it would be a chilling warning to future faculty and students that if you even mildly question the prevailing orthodoxy on campus, you will have hell to pay.
Yale students, alumni, and members of the public must demand that the Christakises face no threat of punishment, and if either professor steps down now or in the coming months, it must be understood to represent Yaleās glaring failure to live up to its to protect and honor freedom of speech on campus.
Recent Articles
Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOSās award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Brendan Carrās Bizarro World FCC

Day 100! Abridging the First Amendment: Zick releases major resource report on Trumpās executive orders ā First Amendment News 468Ā

Detaining Ćztürk over an op-ed is unlawful and un-American
