Johns Hopkins University leaders have revised their policy on issuing official public statements, stating that the university would only release official public statements on issues that pertain directly to the “interest or function” of the institution.
In a message to Hopkins faculty, President Ron Daniels, Provost Ray Jayawardhana, and the deans of the nine academic divisions and Sheridan libraries clarified and detailed the reasoning for the tightening of restraint on public statements. They wrote that university statements should be made “only in the limited circumstances where an issue is clearly related to a direct, concrete, and demonstrable interest or function of the university.”
The Hub, Johns Hopkins University’s news center, reported that universities are often asked to issue statements around myriad global, national, and local issues, and the JHU message noted that those requests are “usually grounded in a sense of connection to the values and purpose of our university and our common humanity.”
The school’s leaders expressed concern, however, that these statements might curtail the free exchange of ideas and open discourse — a university’s core function.
“The very idea of an ‘official’ position of the university on a social, scientific, or political issue runs counter to our foundational ethos—articulated most clearly in our Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom—to be a place where competing views are welcomed, challenged, and tested through dialogue and rigorous marshalling of evidence,” they wrote. “The university is the site, more than any other institution in our society, where the process of truth-seeking through intense and open contestation is given pride of place. Although institutional statements may feel warranted, consoling, or, at times, even necessary to guide the university through difficult moments, experience has shown that they can be counterproductive, and even at odds with our core mission.”
University leaders want to avoid the appearance of the school holding a particular view on a social or political issue that might not “align with those held by some members of the Hopkins community,” according to the Hub. They also want to make sure they are not relying on official statements alone on matters that require action. Rather than appearing “performative,” university leaders hope to take actions that lead to meaningful change.
The policy on issuing official public statements applies only to university statements from the president, provost, and deans. It does not include faculty members in either their scholarly or personal communication. The new clarification of restraint applies only to those specific university officials to allow the rest of the faculty greater freedom of expression without worrying about clashing with an official university position.
When tragedy or great controversy occurs, JHU plans to create “educational programming that addresses difficult topics and, when appropriate, offering direct support for those most affected,” according to the Hub.
The university is no stranger to controversy, as students and community members set up an encampment on campus on April 29, 2024 and engaged in protests over the war between Israel and Hamas. The encampment ended on May 12, 2024, after coming to an agreement with university officials.
“Ours is an extraordinary institution, a place furthered by the courageous interrogation and boundless discovery of our colleagues. The project of the university as an institution is to create the conditions for that exploration, discovery, and engagement—even for controversial or disquieting ideas,” university leaders wrote. “Against that overarching and foundational goal, we believe that the policy of restraint to which we are now committing ourselves is timely, principled, and critical for the continuing relevance and mission of our university.”
