The following op-ed first appeared at https://cornelliansunited.org/slope-day-must-honor-free-expression/ and is reposted here with the permission of the author.
The Cornell community must coalesce around the ideal of protecting college campuses as a place that is open to all, even to speakers who may provoke us to anger or to counter-protest. The April 24 cancellation of the Slope Day performance of Kehlani put Cornell to the test, and Cornell flunked.
In prior years, the Student Assembly (SA) was criticized for booking low-quality entertainers for Slope Day. Although the SA allocates money for Slope Day from the student activity fee, the actual Slope Day planning is done by the Slope Day Programming Board (SDPB). The SA increased the annual budget to $50 per student. The SDPB conducted two rounds of student surveys to help narrow down the choice of headline performer.
The SA and President Kotlikoff were aware of Kehlani’s reputation before signing the contract for her performance. At Day Hall’s recommendation, a clause was added to her contract, which specified that her performance would be free from political messaging; otherwise, she would forfeit her performance fee.
A pro-Israel group started to organize a counter-event and raised at least $28,528 through a GoFundMe page.
Admittedly, President Michael Kotlikoff was in a very difficult position. The Trump Administration is investigating Cornell for violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by creating an environment that allegedly makes Jewish students feel threatened by antisemitism. Kehlani has previously posted on social media pro-Palestine views regarding the Gaza conflict.
In many ways, this concert is like the many cases where a group invites a speaker to campus, and advocates of an opposing view advocate for canceling the invitation. The recently adopted Expressive Activity Policy addresses this situation:
“Cornell community members will promote ideas that diverge, and the resulting conflict is healthy in a university devoted to the pursuit of knowledge. It is not the role of a university to shield members from ideas simply because they are seen as wrongheaded, disagreeable, immoral, or even deeply offensive. Although civility and mutual respect are highly valued at Cornell, they cannot, on their own, be used as justifications for closing off the free expression of ideas.”
Kotlikoff’s statement counters this policy point with an argument that Slope Day is supposed to unify the community:
“While any artist has the right in our country to express hateful views, Slope Day is about uniting our community, not dividing it.”
The problem is that such an argument can be made against the invitation of any speaker or performer. Just because a speaker has said an objectionable thing in the past does not justify the assumption that he or she will say the same thing at Cornell. Indeed, Kehlani had not raised Palestine at her recent performance in March at Northeastern University and was contractually bound not to do or say anything political at Cornell. Kehlani’s social media should be irrelevant to respecting the SDPB invitation to perform.
The idea of blacklisting a performer or speaker is very troubling and should have no place in academia. History has shown blacklisting to be a mistake. During the McCarthy era, the nation’s most prominent nuclear physicist, J. Robert Oppenheimer, had his security clearance revoked and was removed from various federal committees. However, he had a prior invitation to come to the University of Washington to deliver scientific lectures. That school cancelled his speaking invitation not because of his physics beliefs, but rather on the remote possibility that he was sympathetic to communism, and the university feared angering the public and the government. Isn’t the same thing happening with Kehlani?
A second dangerous idea is used to justify the Kehlani cancellation – that because mandatory student activity fees fund the performance, it must be unifying and non-controversial. However, almost all outside speakers brought to campus are funded by mandatory tuition or fees. For example, the American Studies Department, College Republicans, and the Cornell Political Union all receive funding from mandatory tuition and fees. Under this precedent, if any of them invites a speaker, the choice would be limited to a speaker who will not make others uncomfortable.
Having cancelled Kehlani, students are organizing a second GoFundMe for an alternative Slope Day. In addition, on May 1, the Student Assembly passed Resolution 58 that prevents Cornell administrators from considering “the political viewpoints, affiliations and lawful political expression of prospective performers” when weighing in on student-sponsored performances.
Beyond the contract for a headliner, the question remains how much protesting will be allowed at the Slope Day outdoor performance venue. The audience will pass through checkpoints in order to prevent outside food or alcohol from being brought into the controlled area. Cornell event staff has been vague about other objects, such as Palestinian flags or keffiyeh. Under the Expressive Activity Policy, the quiet display of such objects is protected by the First Amendment and is allowed. Similarly, wearing Slope Day t-shirts with political messages is also protected by the First Amendment.
While interfering with any performer’s right to speak or sing is not allowed, Slope Day regulations should not be used to hinder demonstrations regarding censorship or any other subject.
Ultimately, Slope Day must be organized by students for students. In cancelling Kehlani, President Kotlikoff dishonored important principles of both free expression and self-governance.
