Who Will Protect NJ From Gottheimer the Book Banner?
Editor’s Note: If you saw a headline in the media about a successful effort to thwart book banning you would probably assume it was about some school board controversy initiated perhaps by a conservative group concerned about “Critical Race Theory” or some other from a litany of topics that conservatives have tried to ban from schools. You would not think that the book that was suggested for banning would have been defended from a NJ member of US Congress who is marketing himself now as the next governor of New Jersey, Josh Gottheimer – yes the same one who recently announced at his campaign launch that sending the cops after the movement against genocide is central to his platform. He is also united with the most Trump-ian member of the House of Representatives Virginia Foxx sponsoring a bill that forces investments in the failed Israel economy under punishment of cutting of federal funds. Sadaf Jaffer, a former assembly woman and NJ mayor has recently referred to Gottheimer as a hateful anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and anti-Muslim bigot who is willing to destroy our free speech rights” . Below is an excerpt of the response from President of Princeton Christopher L.
Eisgruber to Gottheimer’s attempt to dictate Princeton currriculum.
President of Princeton Christopher L. Eisgruber begins his letter: “Thank you for your letter of September 10 questioning whether a professor at this University may assign and teach Dr. Jasbir Puar’s controversial book, The Right to Maim: Debility, Capacity, Disability.”
After explaining his own background as the second Jewish President of Princeton, with a family member having been a holocaust refugee who has written supportively of Zionism, President Eisgruber outlined the process in place at Princeton regarding academic freedom, course selection and review. The following is where he focused on explaining why he was not going to heed Gottheimer’s request to ban this book:
“When faculty members teach a course within our curriculum, academic freedom protects their right to decide what texts they will assign and how best to cover the subject matter. Princeton University Professor Keith Whittington, who serves on the Academic Committee of the Academic Freedom Alliance, observes that “the right of university professors to assign their preferred books to a class without interference from university administrators is one of the fundamental features of academic freedom in the United States. … If a book is relevant to the subject matter, it is up to the professional judgment of the faculty member as to whether it should be used.”[2]
Like Princeton’s commitment to free speech, the principle of academic freedom sweeps broadly, encompassing even books that may be deemed “offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong‑headed” by students, faculty, the University administration, or others, including elected office holders.[3] Those who disagree with a book, or a syllabus, are free to criticize it but not to censor it. Such arguments are the lifeblood of a great university, where controversies must be addressed through deliberation and debate, not administrative fiat.
Your letter concludes by asserting that colleges “must protect all students, including Jewish students” from being “made to feel unsafe by curricula.” That assertion misunderstands the role of a university, where students inevitably encounter controversial and sometimes disturbing ideas. As I said earlier, Princeton will work vigorously to ensure that all students can thrive here, but not by censoring our curriculum.
Your assertion also underestimates the strength and resilience of Princeton students. Indeed, many of our students, both Jewish and non-Jewish, have spoken up for the importance of academic freedom and defended the right of Professor Larson to assign Dr. Puar’s book. [4] I have no doubt that they have the intelligence and independence to interrogate, challenge, and learn from texts with which they disagree. This University will continue to foster those discussions inside and outside the classroom, and we will adhere steadfastly to the principles of free speech and academic freedom that are essential to our mission.”
Editor’s Note: Thankfully the Princeton President did not allow Congress member Gottheimer to dictate the curriculum and book choice or to bend the rules and safeguards at Princeton to his dictatorial whims. Do we though want Gottheimer the book banner to have so much power as Governor, already recommending that colleges be defunded if they do not invest in Israel’s failed economy – who has already sought to ban a book with which he disagrees from esteemed Princeton University – is this what NJ is looking to make the next Governor? This FightBackBetter Editor says HELL NO!
