Indiana State Police pass out notices to protesters on Saturday, April 27. (WTIU News)
Indiana University Bloomington Faculty Council President Colin Johnson said it’s time for university President Pamela Whitten’s administration to end.
In an April 29 letter, Johnson commented on IU Divestment Coalition’s protests and subsequent arrests in Dunn Meadow last week. Fifty-seven protesters were arrested after they did not comply with a university policy that was updated suddenly and without notice.
Provost Rahul Shrivastav and other university leaders changed the assembly policy adopted in 1969 one day before encampment protests. The policy now bans unapproved structures such as tents and posters in Dunn Meadow. Whitten said Indiana State Police and IU Police Department were called to deal with the protesters.
In his letter, Johnson said he has reluctantly concluded there’s no viable way for the Whitten administration to continue.
“It has sometimes felt as if we have received nothing but time-consuming distractions and repeated blows to our sense of the institution’s near and long-term stability, although I am willing to admit that this may just be my sheer exhaustion talking,” Johnson wrote.
But Johnson said the original assembly policy shows understanding of “profound commitment to freedom of expression” and that the university should not use physical force.
“The very fact that physical force was used as the enforcement mechanism at all is an affront to the (now blatantly) obvious wisdom reflected in the language of that policy as it was originally crafted,” Johnson wrote. “That physical force was used as a first resort, on the very first day of the protest, rather than a last resort, constitutes an even greater affront to that wisdom.”
Johnson did not respond to requests for additional comment.
Johnson wrote that the situation at IU has deteriorated and is out of hand. He said he is skeptical of Whitten’s promises to listen and learn from faculty.
“Rather, I strongly suspect that what she will continue to do is what she has done for the past three years, which is make one questionable decision after another resulting in one terrible headline after another, and then blame the chaos she has played an integral role in creating on somebody else, or on circumstances beyond her control,” Johnson said.
Whitten and Shrivastav issued a statement Sunday explaining the university’s response. In it, they said unapproved encampments become “magnets for those making threats of violence,” adding this movement coincides with “a troubling rise in antisemitism nationally and on college campuses.”
Johnson said violence only occurred at Dunn Meadow when police visited the protest. At the time of arrests, Johnson said tents would have been allowed by the original policy.
The protesters were exercising their First Amendment rights, Johnson said, and not posing a threat. He said Dunn Meadow’s designation as a free speech zone since 1969 made it unlike other campuses with encampment protests. These campuses don’t have a place like Dunn Meadow set aside to safeguard freedom of speech while minimizing disruption.
“Yet despite being handed a ready-made solution to the supposedly intractable challenges that campuses across the country are currently facing that might have allowed Indiana University Bloomington to serve as a model for those other institutions, the Whitten administration decided instead to lean into its own impulsiveness and follow rather than lead on the theory that doing otherwise might result in the situation deteriorating and potentially getting out of hand,” Johnson wrote.
BFC President-Elect Danielle M. DeSawal said in an email to the council that the BFC was not involved in the decision to change assembly policy or the decision to contact police. DeSawal met with Shrivastav and Whitten.
“Entering the meeting yesterday, two short-term goals were to have the addendum revoked and gain assurance that the Indiana State Police would not engage with our community,” DeSawal said. “As you can gather from the message, that was not achieved.”
“While we were able to have productive conversations, I am disappointed in the early release of the message to provide an update, as it was sent without review of anyone who was in the meeting,” DeSawal continued. “That has resulted in additional confusion and more mistrust in our ability to move forward collectively with the administration. It saddens me deeply to have to share that viewpoint.”
This story was updated to include Colin Johnson's full open letter.
Aubrey is our higher education reporter and a Report For America corps member. Contact her at aubmwrig@iu.edu or follow her on X @aubreymwright.
