Since the October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel, American college campuses have been hubs of protest and dissent. The situation at Columbia University has been notably contentious, marked by protests attracting hundreds of demonstrators. And what began as a peaceful demonstration on April 17 voicing support for Palestine’s struggle for sovereignty quickly morphed into a scene of confrontation between the administration, specifically the president, and the entire community including students, faculty, and staff.
Columbia's administration, like many of its collegial counterparts across the country, has endeavored to fine-tune a response that balances free speech, discipline, and institutional and national politics. The university’s approach was the focal point of a congressional hearing on April 17. In Washington, Nemat Shafik—Columbia's president—attempted to alleviate Republican lawmakers' dubious concerns by acknowledging that the university had been unprepared for the tensions of recent months and promised new methods of repressing disruptive protests. Although her answers appeared to satisfy many lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Shafik's responses stirred unrest on campus. Hours before Dr. Shafik’s testimony, students had constructed an encampment on a designated protest area; the students brandished placards and shouted slogans for Columbia to cut ties with Israeli academic institutions and disinvest from Israel-linked entities in protest of the war in Palestine.
Less than 24 hours before the hearing adjourned and the encampment was constructed, New York City police officers in riot gear entered the private campus at the request of Dr. Shafik and other Columbia leaders. The police swept into the encampment to arrest defiant protestors and dismantle the demonstration— authorities reported more than 100 arrests.
The administration’s decision provoked fresh outcry from students, faculty members, and broader communities, who disputed shutting down a peaceful protest—particularly on a campus that is expected to promote the principles of free speech. For example, a group of faculty members declared with a vote on April 25, 2024 that they have no confidence in President Shafik. Of the 709 faculty who cast a vote, 65 percent supported the motion, 29 percent were against it, and 6 percent chose to abstain. Moreover, Xander Grossman ’26 expresses, “Personally, as a student, I love to see other students who care about a common issue taking action and I feel the desperation of Columbia students, particularly when the response to a relatively simple plea was an aggressive police response.”
Following this, hundreds of faculty members participated in a walkout and signed open letters expressing dissatisfaction with the way Dr. Shafik has handled the protest. On April 26, 2024, The Columbia University Senate voted in favor of a resolution calling for an investigation of Dr. Shafik’s leadership.