Last week, Northwestern’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors circulated a petition for the Faculty Assembly to consider 10 resolutions on academic freedom.
The resolutions grew out of “a frustration with the failure of Northwestern’s leadership and also the Faculty Senate, frankly, to protect … academic freedom at Northwestern,” political science Prof. Jacqueline Stevens, president of NU-AAUP said.
Stevens said the resolutions are in response to the University’s handling of the Trump administration — which recently froze $790 million in federal funding for NU, citing Title VI investigations of antisemitism on campus.
Communication Prof. Linda Gates, member-at-large for NU-AAUP, cited threats to freedom of speech and open debate as motivating factors for the resolutions. She called these concepts “the cornerstone of the university.”
“The situation is so dire for everything — for the University, for the country — that my colleagues and I feel we have to do something,” she said.
The petition received the required 75 faculty signatures by the Monday deadline to add the resolutions to the Faculty Assembly meeting agenda next week.
What is the Faculty Assembly?
NU-AAUP turned to the Faculty Assembly after failing to advance its resolutions via the University administration and Faculty Senate.
“We decided to take advantage of a governance procedure at Northwestern that anticipates this kind of situation and allows the faculty to directly pass their own resolutions,” Stevens said.
The Assembly is a distinct entity from the Faculty Senate. The Senate meets monthly and handles day-to-day legislative matters, whereas the Assembly meets twice each year and serves as a forum for all faculty members to vote. Its authority supersedes the Senate when it has a quorum — 10% of the faculty body — present, said Jorge Coronado, NU-AAUP’s treasurer.
The proposed resolutions are scheduled to be discussed at the April 21 meeting. While resolutions passed by the Assembly are non-binding, part of the goal, Coronado said, is to make faculty members aware of their own voice.
“We’re trying to make it so people are more aware that these avenues do exist, and weak though they are, they can be made stronger,” he said.
Highlights of NU-AAUP’s resolutions
Resolutions one through three call on the University to protect First Amendment rights to free speech, while the fourth resolution demands the University not require students or faculty to complete the anti-bias training unveiled in February.
The fifth resolution calls for faculty members under investigation to be able to record and release their interactions with investigators. In light of the intended termination of Medill Prof. Steven Thrasher, this resolution has garnered attention recently.
Stevens, who is also the founding director of NU’s Deportation Research Clinic, drew specific attention to resolutions six and seven, which directly respond to the recent deportations of students at peer institutions. These resolutions demand that NU not release names or records to the government without a court order and withdraw from its “discretionary participation” in E-Verify, a program used to verify a person’s employment eligibility.
Resolution eight would limit the University’s ability to view digital materials stored on NU devices such as email accounts. The ninth resolution calls on the University to draw on its endowment.
The 10th resolution calls for the addition of eight “faculty visitors” to the Board of Trustees. These visitors, selected by the Assembly, would have “the right to attend all board meetings and review Board records.” The creation of the faculty visitor positions and greater Board oversight is a long-standing NU-AAUP goal, according to chapter leaders.
“That would mean a position where we’re able to monitor and speak out about … the Board of Trustees,” Coronado said.
Coronado also criticized the Board’s guidance to University administration on how to handle federal pressure.
He said the University’s current approach of “anticipatory obedience,” may be a slippery slope, pointing to what has happened at Columbia University. Despite Columbia’s accession to many Trump administration demands, the government is still seeking a consent decree that would put Columbia under judicial oversight.
“As a university, Northwestern can choose to agree with the federal government and see itself remade in the image of Trump,” Coronado said. “Or, it can choose to resist it.”
Email: s.draeger-mazer@dailynorthwestern.com
X: @sashadm27
Bluesky: @sashadm.bsky.social
Related Stories:
— Faculty express disappointment, uncertainty as Trump administration freezes federal funds
— Medill denies tenure, intends to terminate Prof. Steven Thrasher next year
