Letter From the Editor: Trinity Must Act to Protect Students

Olivia Silvey ’25

Editor-in-Chief

Last week, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested a student at Columbia University for his participation and leadership in on-campus protests against Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. His arrest marks one of the first federal moves against pro-Palestinian student protestors and international students that Donald Trump announced during his presidency. The student’s arrest, and the federal government’s vow to revoke his green card, is a ominous foreshadowing of what could, and likely will, happen to student activists across this country. While Trinity has been a relatively safe environment for activists and international students, it’s time for our administration to solidify their protection of now-vulnerable groups.  

Trinity has taken a few slight steps regarding the possibility of ICE entering campus; the Dean of Students Office website has resources for international students on the limitations and policies of federal immigration officers entering campus. Furthermore, at the Feb. 14 Town Hall, Vice President of Student Success and Enrollment Joe DiChristina directed students to the webpage when representatives expressed concern over ICE entering campus. DiChristina assured students that Campus Safety is trained on how to respond to federal agents coming onto campus in a way that protects students. 

As supportive as these words are from the College and DiChristina, Trinity administration has a strong reputation for talking the talk but not walking the walk; rarely do their actions materially align with their public statements. Trinity claims to protect free speech, yet admonishes students for a peaceful protest (although those admonitions were eventually dropped); Trinity claims to support communities on campus such as cultural houses and social justice organizations, yet fights student advocates tooth and nail when presented with solutions. At this point, I have very little faith that Trinity truly aims to protect its students during dangerous and uncertain times such as now. 

One fear that could be preventing colleges like Trinity from actively combatting the federal government’s targeting of international student protestors is the potential loss of funding. On Friday, March 7, the Trump administration announced that it will cut $400 million worth of grants and contracts from Columbia University due to the institution’s failure to shut down anti-Semitism on campus, citing pro-Palestine activism such as the spring 2024 encampment, occupations of campus buildings and class disruptions. Almost immediately, Columbia’s interim president fell in line with the Trump administration’s egregious crackdown, releasing a statement on March 9 declaring their intention to uphold federal law. How humiliating for a school that holds, or used to hold, such prestige. 

Trinity only received slightly over $1 million in federal and state grants in 2024, which means that the risk and consequence of pulling government funds is relatively low. This puts Trinity in a unique position to fight back against Trump’s draconian measures and use its resources – monetary and otherwise – to support international students. Trinity does not have to come up with these supports on their own; at the Town Hall, students provided multiple solutions for administration. Examples include: “Officially designate Trinity a Sanctuary Campus and implement the concomitant protections required for the designation (including but not limited to prohibiting the School from sharing any information regarding immigration status); Provide for and communicate explicit protections for student activists from ICE; Declare the preservation of financial aid provisions for international students.”  

Another way Trinity could support its students is in the Connecticut legislature. Also on Friday, March 7, the State Legislature heard testimony for SB980 which proposed establishing stronger relationships between Campus Safety and Connecticut police by special task force in order to combat hate speech. It soon became clear that the bill’s goal was to increase policing on campus and likely criminalize campus activism. Over 100 people submitted written testimonies on the bill, and dozens more presented their testimonies in person, with most people advocating against the bill’s passing. Multiple Trinity students showed up to push against the bill; where was Trinity administration? At the bare minimum, what is Trinity’s response to this bill? Almost a month prior, DiChristina assured students of their safety at the Town Hall after many expressed genuine fear and uncertainty about their position on campus. When an opportunity presented itself for Trinity to act on that assurance, they did not show up – students and community members did. 

Trinity College has always been a follower, not a leader, in higher education. We saw this in the 1980s with students’ drawn-out push to divest from South African apartheid; we saw this in October 2024 when the Board of Trustees rejected the proposal to divest from war crimes; and again we see this in Trinity’s empty words in a tumultuous time for a large segment of its students. 

With strong faith in our students and surrounding Hartford community, and utter disappointment in Trinity administration, I call on the College to, for once, act in accordance with its supposed written values. Now is time for Trinity to advocate against pro-policing bills such as SB980, make explicitly clear what tangible protections international students and protestors have on campus and actively push back against increased danger and surveillance on private College grounds. 

With peace,

OPS