FAS Dean Hoekstra Defends 2-Week Library Bans for Harvard Activists

Faculty of Arts and Sciences Dean Hopi E. Hoekstra gave a full-throated endorsement of Harvard Library’s decision to temporarily ban protesters who staged library study-ins Tuesday, delivering a pointed rebuke to faculty who criticized the two-week bans as a threat to free speech.

Hoekstra’s remarks, at a Tuesday meeting of the FAS, make her the first top administrator outside the library system to throw her support behind the penalties — and mark an unusually bold statement from a dean who typically avoids staking out public stances on campus politics.

“Protests are a normal part of university life, and so are rules to govern the times and places they occur,” Hoekstra said. “Our current rules clearly state that libraries are not the place for organized group demonstrations.”

“I fully support Martha Whitehead in her implementation of this University policy,” she added, referring to the head of Harvard’s library system. Whitehead reports jointly to Hoekstra and Provost John F. Manning ’82.

Since late September, library study-ins have become the protest of choice for Harvard’s campus activists. Five groups of students have held silent library protests this semester, and one group of faculty members held a study-in of their own to protest the suspensions against students.

As a result, more than 100 students and roughly 25 faculty members have temporarily lost their access to the respective libraries they protested in. Many have elected to appeal these decisions to library leadership.

Until Tuesday, the justifications for the suspensions came from Harvard Library leadership alone. In a statement on the library’s website, Whitehead defended the suspensions, saying the protests’ use of coordinated signage made them disruptive.

Hoekstra’s decision to explicitly back the bans positions her in front of other University leaders, who have largely skirted around the issue even when pressed.

In an interview last month, Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana repeatedly refused to address the suspensions, saying he invited “feedback and dialogue” regarding campus protest rules. University President Alan M. Garber ’76 similarly said he thought it was “appropriate” to discipline participants but stopped short of endorsing the two-week bans.

Study-in participants have argued that the measures selectively penalize them for expressing their political beliefs while using campus libraries for precisely their intended purpose: silently studying.

But Hoekstra contended that punishing students and faculty for holding organized protests in a library is not the same as punishing them for sporting clothing or laptop stickers that broadcast a political message.

She also rebuffed activists’ assertion that the study-ins were not, in fact, protests — arguing that the actions, organized and advertised in advance and often recorded by camera-toting students, bore all the hallmarks of demonstrations.

“These are events with a start and end point, with a clear set of participants, and a clear message,” Hoekstra said. “They are not simply individuals reading.”

Government professor Ryan D. Enos, who participated in an Oct. 16 faculty study-in against the first round of student suspensions, wrote in a statement that he was not convinced by Hoekstra’s reasoning.

“Dean Hoekstra has a difficult job, but she’s on the wrong side of this issue,” Enos wrote. “Universities are places that must favor free expression. Especially at times when free expression is under threat.”

An FAS spokesperson declined to comment on Enos’ criticism.

In her Tuesday remarks, Hoekstra also said the two-week suspensions were “consciously structured to not impede academic work,” noting that students could request to pick up library materials at other locations and receive exemptions to attend classes held in Widener.

She cast the suspensions as consistent with decades of University policy, describing the ban on library protests as “part of the University-wide Statement on Rights and Responsibilities,” a 1970 document governing speech and protest on campus.

The USRR does not mention restrictions on protests in libraries, though it does grant University officials “the right to establish orderly procedures consistent with imperatives of academic freedom.”

The ban on library protests was rolled out in a January statement that set out more specific time, place, and manner restrictions on campus dissent. The new guidance — billed as a clarification to the USRR — was signed by Harvard’s top academic officials, including Hoekstra, and endorsed by the Harvard Corporation.

Hoekstra told faculty they could use other venues for protest, such as writing editorials, participating in panel discussions, or holding outdoor demonstrations.

“These policies, in fact, protect your right to do so,” she said.

—Staff writer Tilly R. Robinson can be reached at tilly.robinson@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @tillyrobin.

—Staff writer Neil H. Shah can be reached at neil.shah@thecrimson.com. Follow him on X @neilhshah15.