Hussain Ahmad ’30
Contributing Writer
On campus, bulletin boards are constantly covered with flyers for parties, meetings and, sometimes, protests. What people don’t see is the permission needed for them. Under the new Time, Place, and Manner Policy, students no longer need approval to protest. However, an organization still needs permission to put up a poster advertising one — the rules have only been loosened for the protest itself.
The rulebook was never the College’s biggest problem. In the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) 2027 College Free Speech Rankings, Trinity fell 42 places to 223 out of 261, with a grade of F. The drop came from what students told FIRE.
Only 24% of the student body said that the administration protects free speech. Only 15% said the administration was likely to defend speakers’ rights during controversy. On administrative support, Trinity scored lowest in the NESCAC.
Arriving this fall, I needed more context, so I had to read my way into it. Last November, messages supporting Palestine appeared on classroom chalkboards. The messages upset some students, and President Lugo responded via email, claiming that the student handbook and employment policies “clearly prohibit political activism within academic settings.”
FIRE looked and couldn’t find that rule. According to the 2025-2026 handbook, protests “cannot disrupt or obstruct the College’s regular and/or essential operations.” While what President Lugo’s message said was a content ban, the handbook gave one on disruption.
FIRE wrote to the College in December about this. “Trinity did not respond to FIRE’s letter,” Logan Dougherty, FIRE’s senior researcher, told the Tripod. They did count the incident against Trinity, but under their methodology, that one-point penalty “had fully expired by this year’s rankings,” he said.
The protest policy at the time promised to apply “regardless of viewpoint or content.” Laura Belt, FIRE’s director of policy reform, told me that the policy’s demand that all assembly be approved in advance “is not reasonable.” So which was it: a content-neutral policy, or a ban on political activism?
To its credit, Trinity’s new policy swaps approval for advance notice, removes the blanket mask ban and gives students a hearing officer’s review and an appeal. Belt called the end of mandatory notice “a huge improvement”, and the mask change “a great improvement as well.” (Yes, an op-ed about free speech can admit the administration did something right.)
Yet, two problems remain. Firstly, the FIRE survey took place between January and June 2026, before the new policy took effect. Secondly, the poster rule: the new policy says, “Expressing oneself is never an excuse for violating College policies.” Among the policies are the Poster and Banner Regulations. FIRE accounted for Trinity’s posting rules in its rating, with Belt warning that approval “could potentially burden protest publicity even when the protest itself needs no approval.” On top of that, she flagged that Trinity’s event rules never define “social event,” which could leave possibilities for gray areas and guessing about whether prior approval is needed.
Compare this to Wesleyan. When pro-Palestine students set up demonstrations in 2024, President Michael Roth disagreed, yet defended their right to protest anyway. They have the same yellow-light policy rating, no Chicago Statement and no institutional neutrality; still, they climbed to 120th in the ranking, with 48% of the student body saying the administration protects free speech.
We don’t have to guess what fixing the policies would do. FIRE calculates that a green-light policy rating would move Trinity from 223rd to 59th. But getting there means fixing the rules that were the reason for a yellow light: posters that need approval, definitions in the bias-reporting system and harassment policies that don’t meet the legal standard.
The new policy also shows who holds the pen. Vice President for Students, Community, and Institutional Culture Anita Davis told the Tripod that she and Provost and Dean of the Faculty Sonia Cardenas were the “primary authors of the policy,” adding that it “reflects significant input from students at all phases of the process.” But the president has the final say. And the April comment period? “We received 24 written comments,” Davis said. 24, from a campus of about 2,200 undergraduates.
To the College: let students post in dedicated spaces without prior approval, and define what a “social event” is.
To my fellow Bantams: the College is hosting small-group discussions on the policy during Common Hour on Oct. 5 and Oct. 22, with lunch provided. We can do better than 24. No matter your views, don’t remain quiet. The quiet can’t complain when they choose not to speak.
FIRE’s next survey will grade the rules not by their words but by our perception. Until then, when you look at that flyer in The Cave, remember: the protest needed no permission, but the poster did.