RSS
John Hopkins University Adopts ‘Institutional Neutrality’ Policy After Anti-Israel Protests
John Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. Photo: Paul Sableman/Wikimedia Commons
John Hopkins University (JHU) announced that it has adopted a policy of “institutional neutrality” and will not weigh in on topics outside its direct “interest or function,” which ostensibly means it will not issue public statements on contentious political issues.
The decision came after JHU was one of many US universities to experience raucous anti-Israel protests on campus last spring semester.
“The dedication to restraint applies to university statements from the president, provost, and deans,” the university said on Thursday. “It does not apply to individual faculty members in their scholarly or personal capacity. In fact, one intent of the commitment is to extend the broadest possible scope to the views and expressions of faculty, bolstering faculty in the exercise of their freedom to share insights and perspectives without being concerned about running counter to an ‘institutional’ stance.”
It continued, “Moving forward, in considering whether and when to issue a statement, university leaders will determine whether the issue clearly pertains to the ‘direct, concrete, and demonstrable interest or function of the university.’ Determinations will ultimately fall to an internal working group including senior members of the president’s and provost’s staff.”
Coming just a week before the start of its new academic year, the policy addresses a bitter debate in academia over what stance, if any, universities should take on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Israel’s war with Hamas. Anti-Zionist scholar-activists and students have implored administrators to adopt the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, while Zionist and pro-Israel forces have insisted on their denouncing anti-Zionist speech that is antisemitic. In the spring, anti-Zionist students escalated their demands for an anti-Israel boycott by illegally occupying a section of the campus for 13 days.
At the time, JHU pledged that a “petition for divestment will be considered, pursuant to existing policies,” and a committee convened to study it in June. Thursday’s institutional neutrality statement arrived before the committee announced its recommendations. With it, JHU follows Harvard University, Vanderbilt University, and other institutions that have opted against becoming enmeshed in interminable debates. However, some maintain that doing so abdicates the university’s responsibility to stand for principles which hold together the fabric of Western civilization.
“These institutional neutrality policies sound wholesome in the abstract, but I fear they are often just attempts to by college administrators to avoid taking a stand against antisemites, communists, and other radicals who attempt to hijack the university’s credibility to advance their own agendas,” Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars (NAS), told The Algemeiner on Monday.
Wood, the author of several books and hundreds of articles on higher education, has weighed in on the matter before, most recently in a report titled “The Illusion on Institutional Neutrality” which was published in April. The concept, he says, dates back to 1915, but it reached widespread popularity during the Vietnam War, when the University of Chicago issued the “Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action” in 1967. The previous year, over 400 university students held a “sit in” to protest president George Beadle’s decision to provide, with permission, the US Army information — class rank and grade point averages, for example — about students who had registered for the draft. From that controversy emerged what is today known as the “Kalven Report,” the work of a committee chaired by University of Chicago law professor Harry Kalven Jr.
It famously said, “There is no mechanism by which [the university] can reach a collective position without inhibiting that full freedom of dissent on which it thrives … The neutrality of the university as an institution arises then not from a lack of courage nor out of indifference and insensitivity.”
While Wood’s NAS and other organizations once supported its conclusion, Wood argues that it is today insufficient for addressing the threat academic antisemitism poses to the university, which, he says, cannot afford to remain neutral on the issue of anti-Jewish hatred.
“Institutional neutrality empowers the mob by giving the activists of popular causes the assurance that the university’s officials will not get in their way,” Wood argued. “Activists of less favored causes are seldom treated with such leniency. University officials can easily ignore institutional neutrality to run critics of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ off campus, but they seldom if ever stand up to a large group of excited proponents of, say, Hamas apologists.”
He continued, “The ideal has proved delusional, and as a weapon it is easily used against reform as for it. We must call for universities to espouse substantive ideals of truth, liberty, and citizenship, even though they cut directly against the ideological commitments of many of higher education’s administrators and faculty members. This is a challenging task. But Hamas’ massacre of Israelis [on Oct. 7] has stripped us of many illusions … We must say forthrightly what virtues we wish our universities to champion. And if we wish our universities to fight once more on the side of the angels, the swiftest way to that goal is to teach them how to speak with courage by speaking so ourselves.”
As The Algemeiner previously reported, Harvard University followed its adoption of institutional neutrality with several policy decisions which, according to critics, protected those who uttered antisemitic speech. In July, it “downgraded” disciplinary sanctions it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it punished for illegally occupying Harvard Yard, where they called for a genocide of Jews in Israel for five weeks and created a sign which depicted President Alan Garber as an antisemitic caricature. Also, the university has chosen to contest a lawsuit which accuses it of doing little to stop a wave of antisemitic incidents on campus, one of which saw a Jewish student surrounded by a mob students screaming “Shame!” into his ears.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post John Hopkins University Adopts ‘Institutional Neutrality’ Policy After Anti-Israel Protests first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hostage Families Reject Partial Gaza Seal, Demand Release of All Hostages
Demonstrators hold signs and pictures of hostages, as relatives and supporters of Israeli hostages kidnapped during the Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas protest demanding the release of all hostages in Tel Aviv, Israel, Feb. 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Itai Ron
i24 News – As Israeli leaders weigh the contours of a possible partial ceasefire deal with Hamas, the families of the 50 hostages still held in Gaza issued an impassioned public statement this weekend, condemning any agreement that would return only some of the abductees.
In a powerful message released Saturday, the Families Forum for the Return of Hostages denounced what they call the “beating system” and “cruel selection process,” which, they say, has left families trapped in unbearable uncertainty for 638 days—not knowing whether to hope for reunion or prepare for mourning.
The group warned that a phased or selective deal—rumored to be under discussion—would deepen their suffering and perpetuate injustice. Among the 50 hostages, 22 are believed to be alive, and 28 are presumed dead.
“Every family deserves answers and closure,” the Forum said. “Whether it is a return to embrace or a grave to mourn over—each is sacred.”
They accused the Israeli government of allowing political considerations to prevent a full agreement that could have brought all hostages—living and fallen—home long ago. “It is forbidden to conform to the dictates of Schindler-style lists,” the statement read, invoking a painful historical parallel.
“All of the abductees could have returned for rehabilitation or burial months ago, had the government chosen to act with courage.”
The call for a comprehensive deal comes just as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu prepares for high-stakes talks in Washington and as indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas are expected to resume in Doha within the next 24 hours, according to regional media reports.
Hamas, for its part, issued a statement Friday confirming its readiness to begin immediate negotiations on the implementation of a ceasefire and hostage release framework.
The Forum emphasized that every day in captivity poses a mortal risk to the living hostages, and for the deceased, a danger of being lost forever. “The horror of selection does not spare any of us,” the statement said. “Enough with the separation and categories that deepen the pain of the families.”
In a planned public address near Begin Gate in Tel Aviv, families are gathering Saturday evening to demand that the Israeli government accept a full-release deal—what they describe as the only “moral and Zionist” path forward.
“We will return. We will avenge,” the Forum concluded. “This is the time to complete the mission.”
As of now, the Israeli government has not formally responded to Hamas’s latest statement.
The post Hostage Families Reject Partial Gaza Seal, Demand Release of All Hostages first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Melbourne Police Investigate Wave of Antisemitic Attacks, Including Synagogue Arson
Illustrative. Vandals defaced the Melbourne Hebrew Congregation in Australia on June 22, 2025. Photo: Screenshot
i24 News – A wave of antisemitic incidents across Melbourne is under urgent investigation by Victoria Police, after a synagogue was set alight, a Jewish-owned restaurant targeted by protesters, and a third attack saw multiple cars torched at a business in the city’s northeast.
The third incident occurred around 4:30 a.m. Saturday at a business on Para Road in Greensborough. Offenders set fire to three vehicles and sprayed graffiti on both the cars and a nearby building wall. One car was destroyed, and two others sustained moderate damage.
“There were references of antisemitism in the graffiti,” Dunstan confirmed, adding that the business had previously been linked to pro-Palestinian activism.
While police say no direct link between the three incidents has been established yet, they are not ruling out the possibility of coordination.
The attacks began Friday night, when a man was seen pouring a flammable liquid on the entrance of the East Melbourne Hebrew Congregation and setting it alight around 8 p.m., while around 20 people were inside for Shabbat services. Worshipers quickly evacuated through the back, and the fire was contained to the front of the building. No injuries were reported.
Police have released an image of a suspect believed to be in his 30s, of Caucasian appearance, with a beard and long hair.
Just hours after the synagogue arson, a protest of around 70 people moved through Swanston Street before a smaller group gathered outside Miznon, a popular Jewish-owned restaurant in the CBD, chanting offensive slogans. One man was arrested and later released on summons for hindering police.
In response to the series of attacks, federal agencies including the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) have joined the investigation.
“This is disgraceful behavior by a pack of cowards,” said Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan. “Any attack on a place of worship is an act of hate. Any attack on a Jewish place of worship is an act of antisemitism. There should be no hesitation in calling this what it is.”
The post Melbourne Police Investigate Wave of Antisemitic Attacks, Including Synagogue Arson first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Says Iran Has Not Agreed to Inspections, Give Up Enrichment
US President Donald Trump speaks at a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte (not pictured), at the NATO summit in The Hague, Netherlands, June 25, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Iran had not agreed to inspections of its nuclear program or to give up enriching uranium.
He told reporters aboard Air Force One that he believed Tehran’s nuclear program had been set back permanently although Iran could restart it at a different location.
Trump said he would discuss Iran with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visits the White House on Monday.
“I would say it’s set back permanently,” Trump said as he traveled to New Jersey after an Independence Day celebration at the White House. “I would think they’d have to start at a different location. And if they did start, it would be a problem.”
Trump said he would not allow Tehran to resume its nuclear program, adding that Iran did want to meet with him.
The U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Friday it had pulled its last remaining inspectors from Iran as a standoff deepens over their return to the country’s nuclear facilities bombed by the United States and Israel.
The U.S. and Israel say Iran was enriching uranium to build nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.
Israel launched its first military strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites in a 12-day war with the Islamic Republic three weeks ago. The International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors have not been able to inspect Iran’s facilities since then, even though IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has said that is his top priority.
Iran’s parliament has passed a law suspending cooperation with the IAEA until the safety of its nuclear facilities can be guaranteed. While the IAEA says Iran has not yet formally informed it of any suspension, it is unclear when the agency’s inspectors will be able to return to Iran.
Iran has accused the agency of effectively paving the way for the bombings by issuing a damning report on May 31 that led to a resolution by the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations.
The US and Israeli military strikes either destroyed or badly damaged Iran’s three uranium enrichment sites. But it was less clear what has happened to much of Iran’s nine tons of enriched uranium, especially the more than 400 kg (880 pounds) enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.
The post Trump Says Iran Has Not Agreed to Inspections, Give Up Enrichment first appeared on Algemeiner.com.