Protect Free Expression: End Discriminatory Targeting of SJP at UC
Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at the University of Cincinnati is facing the threat of suspension following a peaceful demonstration, raising serious concerns about viewpoint discrimination and the selective enforcement of university policies. Rather than applying its rules consistently, the University appears to be relying on strained interpretations of its Student Code of Conduct while treating SJP differently from other student organizations engaged in comparable activities. This follows a broader pattern of actions targeting SJP that suggests enforcement is driven by the group's advocacy for Palestinian rights rather than by neutral application of campus policies.
A public university has a responsibility to protect free expression, encourage open dialogue, and apply its rules equally regardless of political viewpoint.
We are calling on the University of Cincinnati to:
End all disciplinary sanctions against SJP and its members arising from this incident.
Apply university policies consistently and without regard to political viewpoint.
Publicly reaffirm its commitment to protecting free expression on campus.
Respond to community concerns regarding its handling of this matter.
In October 2025, Students for Justice in Palestine organized a peaceful demonstration outside a conference held on the University of Cincinnati campus titled "Shifting Paradigms, New Horizons: The Abraham Accords, U.S.–Israel Relations, and the Future of the Middle East."
Approximately 150 people participated throughout the day, including students and community members. Protesters used chants and amplified sound to express opposition to the conference and to advocate for Palestinian human rights.
Following the demonstration, the University initiated disciplinary proceedings that targeted specific Arab and muslim leaders, and have now escalated the threat to the broader organization with suspension.
The University's allegations raise serious concerns because they appear to rely on interpretations of university policies by individual administrators that have not been applied in the same way to other student organizations.
Allegation #1: “Failure to Identify”
The University alleges that SJP violated its "Failure to Identify" policy. According to the University's Student Code of Conduct, this provision applies when an individual fails to identify themselves to a university official or law enforcement officer upon request while those officials are acting within the scope of their duties.
Prior to the demonstration, SJP communicated with University administrators regarding its event reservation. During those communications, there was a misunderstanding about the location of the demonstration after administrators assumed the protest to be taking place on the Tangeman steps, a separate reservable space, rather than in the area behind Tangeman where the demonstration was ultimately held.
How is a policy written to address an individual's refusal to identify themselves being applied to a misunderstanding over the description or location of an organization's event?
Allegation #2: “Failure to Comply”/ “Disruption or Obstruction”
The University's second allegation is that SJP failed to comply with directions from University officials regarding the use of amplified sound during the demonstration.
According to the University, organizers exceeded the permitted decibel level for electronic amplification and failed to comply with requests to reduce the volume.
Students present at the demonstration, however, state that while administrators instructed organizers to "quiet down," they did not explain that they believed a specific University policy or permitted decibel limit was being violated. Organizers contend that no one identified the applicable rule, explained what conduct constituted a violation, or informed them that failing to lower the volume could result in disciplinary charges that might threaten the organization's existence.
Many community members have questioned why University officials chose to pursue severe disciplinary action rather than clearly explaining the applicable policy and providing students with a meaningful opportunity to come into compliance. They also note that many other campus events (including those hosted by fraternities, sororities, religious organizations, and other student groups), regularly use microphones, speakers, and amplified sound without resulting in comparable disciplinary proceedings or threats of suspension.
What Happened?
Email Template
URGENT: End the Islamophobic and Anti-Arab Targeting of SJP
Dear University of Cincinnati Administration,
I am deeply troubled by the University of Cincinnati's treatment of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). Regardless of one's political views, students deserve to engage in peaceful expression without fear of selective punishment. As a public university, UC has a responsibility to uphold students’ First Amendment rights and apply its policies fairly and consistently.
The extraordinary disciplinary measures SJP is facing, including the threat of suspension, through the university’s strained interpretations of the Student Code of Conduct raise serious concerns about selective enforcement and efforts to chill protected speech on campus. I am particularly concerned by reports that university officials were present during the demonstration yet failed to clearly explain what specific policy was allegedly being violated or how students could come into compliance. Rather than educating students about alleged policy violations and providing a meaningful opportunity to comply, the University appears to have moved directly toward severe disciplinary action.
This situation is especially concerning given prior incidents in which SJP has appeared to face enforcement actions not imposed on other campus organizations. A pattern of inconsistent enforcement undermines confidence that university policies are being administered in an unbiased manner. This raises the even more alarming concern of Islamophobic and anti-Arab rhetoric driving this selective enforcement. Given the pattern of enforcement described by students and community members, these actions raise serious concerns that a student organization led by a majority Arab and Muslim leadership team is being subjected to discriminatory treatment. Such perceptions undermine trust in the University's commitment to fairness, inclusion, and equal treatment.
Students should not be forced into silence by the threat of disciplinary action for engaging in peaceful political expression.
The University of Cincinnati should be a place where students can engage in peaceful political expression, protected by the First Amendment, without fear that policies will be applied differently because of the views they express. That is the kind of institution parents, donors, alumni, and taxpayers expect and support.
Accordingly, I urge the University to:
End all disciplinary sanctions and suspension proceedings against Students for Justice in Palestine and its members arising from this incident.
Publicly reaffirm the University's commitment to protecting free expression and applying university policies equally regardless of viewpoint.
Respond to these concerns by explaining how the University's actions are consistent with its stated commitments to free expression, open dialogue, and a learning environment that encourages the exchange of differing viewpoints.
I look forward to hearing back from you soon.
Sincerely,
[Name]
[Concerned Student/Parent/Alumni/Donor/etc.]
