History of the Syracuse Statement

In October 2021, Gretchen Ritter joined the University as Provost, and Chancellor Kent Syverud charged Provost Ritter, Chief Student Experience Officer Allen Groves (who arrived in July 2021), Newhouse School of Public Communications Dean Mark Lodato, and Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Dean David Van Slyke to further explore these subjects. One conclusion reached was a commitment to craft an institutional statement in support of freedom of expression.

In January 2024, Chancellor Syverud appointed a working group of University faculty, students, staff, and alumni trustees to draft a statement that would clarify and define the institution’s commitment to academic freedom and free expression. In announcing this work, the Chancellor stated “I believe the time is right for our community to come together to define a framework that will guide future discussions and set parameters for how our community respectfully and constructively engages on complex and provocative issues. The ‘Syracuse Statement’ will reflect the University’s unique perspective and Orange values and reaffirm our historical commitment.”

Chancellor Syverud asked Ritter, a scholar of constitutional rights, democracy and citizenship and the University’s chief academic officer, and Groves, one of the authors of the University of Virginia’s “Statement on Free Expression and Free Inquiry” and the University’s chief student experience officer, to serve as co-chairs. The members of the working group were selected based on subject matter expertise or, in the case of student members, the student government leadership role they held. In addition to Ritter and Groves, the members were:

Martin Abreu Zavaleta, Assistant Professor, Philosophy, College of Arts and Sciences;
Mary Grace Almandrez, Vice President for Diversity and Inclusion;
Steve Ballentine ’83, Alumnus, University Trustee, and Chair of the Free Speech Trustee Advisory Group;
Nina Brown, Associate Professor, Public Communications, Newhouse School of Public Communications;
Sean Drake, Assistant Professor, Sociology, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs;
Lauryn Golden, Crandall Melvin Professor of Law and Director, Syracuse Civics Initiative, College of Law;
Thomas Keck, Professor and Michael O. Sawyer Chair of Constitutional Law and Politics, Maxwell School;
Daniel Kimmel, President and Chief Executive Officer, Graduate Student Organization;
Nathanael Linton L’24, Law Student Representative, Board of Trustees;
Gisele Marcus ’89, Alumna and University Trustee;
Behzad Mortazavi, Dean and Professor, College of Arts and Sciences; and
William Treloar ’24, President, Student Association.

To help inform their work, the working group reviewed free expression statements from a number of colleges and universities, including Boston University, Brown, Colgate, Cornell, Dartmouth, Furman University, Harvard, MIT, NYU, University of Pittsburgh, Princeton, Smith College, Yale, the University of California-Berkeley, the University of Maryland, the University of Missouri, the University of Virginia, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the University of Wyoming. Pertinent articles and reports were also studied, including the “Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action” drafted by the University of Chicago’s Kalven Committee, the Maxwell School Faculty Council’s preliminary draft of the “Maxwell School Shared Principles on Academic Freedom,” the Bipartisan Policy Center’s “What Do Meaningful Free Expression Statements Look Like?” and the Chronicle of Higher Education’s “The Uses and Abuses of the Kalven Report,” among other resource materials.

Significant effort was put into obtaining community input to help inform and guide the working group’s deliberations during spring 2024. This included: a faculty and staff open forum on February 28; a campus community open forum on March 19; and additional focused forums with alumni on March 13; at 113 Euclid (Indigenous students) on March 18; at the Barner-McDuffie House (Black student cultural center) on March 19; with the DEIA Council on March 19; the Student Bar Association on March 21; and the Student Association on March 26.

In addition, a campuswide survey was sent to the University community on March 7 that remained open until March 19. The survey sought feedback on several important questions, including:

Are there aspects of the university’s history or culture that you think are particularly unique or relevant to the university’s commitment to free expression? What are they and why are they relevant?
What can we (as community members) do to increase our university community’s openness to diverse points of view? How can we support active and engaged listening?
What can the university do to make you (as a student, staff, or faculty member) feel more secure in asking questions, expressing yourself, or offering a particular point of view?
What role should community values (e.g., respect, inclusion) play in informing our commitment to freedom of expression?
Should our commitment to free expression be limited in any way? Should there be restrictions on expression targeting a particular group based on identity or other characteristics? Should there be limitations that protect the university’s educational and research missions (e.g., not using a megaphone outside of a classroom)? What role should safety considerations play in regulating our commitment to free expression?
What responsibilities should individuals bear in mind when exercising their right to free expression? Should speakers seek to offer perspectives that are well informed? Should they consider the impact that their words or perspectives will have on others in our community? Should they consider the impact that their words or opinions will have on the university’s reputation within the broader public?

A total of 282 individuals responded to the survey, including 102 faculty, 89 staff, 77 students, and 14 other affiliates. A summary report of the survey responses was distributed to the working group on April 5.

The working group created five subgroups to explore elements identified as core to a final statement. These included:

How does the University’s history and culture inform our commitment to free expression?
Articulation of core free expression principles.
What is the relationship between our commitment to free expression and academic freedom?
Should the University be committed to institutional neutrality regarding free expression and, if so, are there exceptions to this commitment?
What role do community values play in informing our commitment to free expression?

During March and continuing into April and early May, the working group met to craft and discuss the language of the proposed statement. The statement was finalized on May 7, 2024, with all members of the working group signing the statement as evidence of their endorsement of the finished product. It was reviewed with the Syracuse University Board of Trustees during the May 11, 2024 meeting.

The “Syracuse Statement on Free Expression and Free Inquiry” was released to the University community and the broader public in an announcement on May 29, 2024. The new statement was described as “not a statement of policy but rather an aspirational goal that summarizes what we believe our community values [are] and what we hope to engender and achieve as a community when faced with difficult, complex and even divisive issues.” Chancellor Syverud thanked the working group for their work, and noted “Syracuse University has a long history of engaging constructively on complex and provocative issues. The ‘Syracuse Statement’ reinforces our steadfast commitment to the principles of free expression and free inquiry to ensure free speech and academic freedom flourish.”

The new statement received positive feedback from many corners, including from a staff member of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, who noted it “is comprehensive and eloquent and will surely serve Syracuse well in the future as a guide in both peace and controversy.”