Last week, exactly one year after 89 students were arrested during a pro-Palestinian protest on the Green, students once again set up an encampment on College property to call for divestment and other administrative reforms.
While this Editorial Board may never reach consensus to offer an exact free-speech grade to the administration, we speak in one voice today. The College’s response on May 1, 2025, was significantly better than a year prior.
As this Editorial Board has previously argued, our campus’ relationship with free expression was fundamentally damaged after May 1 last year. In our Verbum Ultimum last week, we wrote about how students are self-censoring and backing away from activism due to fear of arrest.
This phenomenon concerns us deeply. It is essential that Dartmouth students feel protected to exercise their First Amendment rights, especially on issues where they feel deep moral urgency. Those rights unequivocally extend to free speech in the classroom and freedom to protest. Our Editorial Board offers this sentiment not with partisan intent, but with a conviction that academic inquiry is predicated upon constitutional and ideological freedom.
Last week, we observed just how differently the events of May 1, 2024, could have been handled.
The College stuck with their negotiator — senior vice president for campus and community life Jennifer Rosales — instead of calling in law enforcement. After 36 hours, the student protesters walked away with their dignity intact, their tents taken down and upcoming disciplinary proceedings instead of handcuffs. Though one may reasonably criticize the use of disciplinary process to punish peaceful protest or challenge Dartmouth’s policy on encampments, this Editorial Board agrees that it is a better alternative to having riot police on campus.
Furthermore, the protesters received three promises from the College: an added provision to the Office of Visa and Immigration Service’s federal agent policy, a clarification on the upper limit of student legal defense funding and a commitment from the Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility to issue a written response to the divestment proposal by May 20. As a result of these measures, international students have more resources and reassurance of their safety on campus.
We know that the two encampments differed in many ways — including that last year more students were involved in protest, both on campus and across the country. Still, the takeaway is clear: regardless of the political situation nationally or at other schools, peaceful protest at Dartmouth should never be met with forcible arrest. The episode last week was a step towards how protest on a college campus should look.
As students, our primary obligations must be to our studies. However, when students choose to protest, they should be heard with respect, and any consequences should reflect their presence on campus as students. Student protesters should not be treated as outside disruptors. They are part of our community, and dissent is an essential part of our shared liberal arts education; having the freedom to publicly disagree with any institution, especially the College, is the right of every Dartmouth student.
Last week, the College’s response was more in line with our liberal arts mission. Though their motivations for avoiding law enforcement are unknown — it may be the product of genuine reflection, or a political calculation in a difficult moment — we welcome this development with open arms.
The editorial board consists of opinion staff columnists, the opinion editors, the executive editors and the editor-in-chief.
