Kashmala Khan ’29 & Alex Gervais ’28
Managing Editor & Executive Opinion and Design Editor
In a letter shared with the Tripod titled “The Sit-in and Its Aftermath; 58 years later,” the Student Government Association is urging Trinity’s leadership team to change the College’s policy on student protest. Conversations around the policy were reignited after the administration’s response to chalk messages in favor of Palestinian liberation on blackboards in Seabury in Nov. 2025. SGA had formerly expressed their discontent with the policy in a Nov. 18, 2025 Opinion article in the Tripod. SGA’s official issues with the policy excerpted from their letter are: “The policy being constructed using ‘expressive activity,’ this term is not only never defined in the policy but is vague; the policy should be specifically aimed at protests and demonstrations… The use of ‘disruptive’ instead of ‘substantially disruptive.’ By their very nature, all protests are disruptive; our administration should however only be concerned about protests which may cause harm to their students, faculty, or staff … The time and place parameters leave many students believing there is no time or place on this campus for protests or demonstrations… There is no clear process for students who are found to be against the policy… The appeal process going to only the Dean of Student Life once again gives the students no transparency into this process.”
SGA is urging administration to create a new policy that: “supports and protects students’ First-Amendment rights to the freedom of speech, freedom to petition and freedom to assemble… that clearly describes when students are allowed to protest and supports that right… that is clearly for protests and demonstrations, not ‘expressive activity’… that is written by a group of students, faculty and staff, and a transparency from that group as to the process of writing this policy… that is voted on by the Student Body… [and] an honor council [that consists] of students, faculty and staff, for any consequences a student may face for breaking the policy. This should also be true for any appeals made by a student.”
The full letter is as follows:
The Sit-in and Its Aftermath; 58 years later
We as the Student Government Association believe that Trinity should not only allow their students the right to protest, but support and protect those same students. Acknowledging Trinity’s long history of protest, we take from the article ‘Anti-war Dissent at Trinity, 1969-73’, published on Trinity’s own Bicentennial website, Steve Barkan ’73 states, “I am speaking only for myself here, but I believe that Trinity provided a rather supportive environment from 1969-73 for those of who were against the Vietnam War.” We urge that the same supportive environment be in place for students today.
In an attempt to tighten the current policy and its frankly vague language we have concluded that the current wording does not allow for this clarity, and it would therefore be crucial to rewrite this policy. In order to provide the clarity needed for such an important policy, the only way forward is to rewrite rather than revise.
We find the following issues currently in the policy:
• The policy being constructed using “expressive activity”, this term is not only never defined in the policy but is vague; the policy should be specifically aimed at protests and demonstrations. Would a student singing in their dorm be considered an expressive activity? What if the song has a political message?
• The use of “disruptive” instead of “substantially disruptive”. By their very nature, all protests are disruptive; our administration should however only be concerned about protests which may cause harm to their students, faculty, or staff. Originating from the Tinker vs. Des Moines (1969) Supreme Court decision, it would require evidence of actual or threatened interference, not just fear of disruption, often resulting in safety issues or the inability to proceed with activities (Tinker v. De Moines).
• The TIME and PLACE parameters leave many students believing there is no time or place on this campus for protests or demonstrations. With that, there is vague language around ‘academic hours’, is that 9 AM to 4 PM or 8 AM to 9 PM?
• There is no clear process for students who are found to be against the policy. Who in Student Life will be reviewing these cases? How can students be sure that the conversations in that room are content neutral?
• The appeal process going to only the Dean of Student Life once again gives the students no transparency into this process.
As these issues are the very core of the policy, this policy must be completely rewritten. We urge the new policy to meet the following requirements:
• A policy that supports and protects students’ First-Amendment rights to the freedom of speech, freedom to petition and freedom to assemble.
• A policy that clearly describes when students are allowed to protest and supports that right.
• A policy that is clearly for protests and demonstrations, not “expressive activity” • A policy that is written by a group of students, faculty and staff, and a transparency from that group as to the process of writing this policy.
• A policy that is voted on by the Student Body.
• An honor council, consisting of students, faculty and staff, for any consequences a student may face for breaking the policy. This should also be true for any appeals made by a student.
We would finally like to remind the college of Trinity’s own history with protest. In 1968, students locked seven members of the board of trustees, and two administrators into a room for 31 hours. The students walked out with their demands met, and no punishment by the administration (Trinity Students End Their Sit-In). 58 years later we still speak of those students and recognize them as pivotal to making Trinity a safe and equal space for all students, no matter your race, sex or national origin. During the Vietnam War, Trinity once again saw a rise in protests on its campus, as did campuses across the country. At a time when protestors across the country were being targeted by law enforcement, we have come to understand that Trinity supported its students and attempted to protect them. We ask that the current Trinity administration have the same respect and belief in its students today, fifty years later, and continue to foster a community of “Bold, Independent Thinkers.”
Signed the Trinity College Student Government Association as passed by a majority vote on February 15th 2026.
+ There are no comments
Add yours