On Institutional Neutrality and the Purpose of a University

Abstract

In November 1969, the Council of the American Association of University Professors confessed that it found itself divided on the question of whether institutions of higher education should remain neutral on the political and social controversies of the day. The division on the AAUP Council mirrored the divisions within the professoriate more generally. Universities, academic departments, and scholarly societies were inundated with demands that they take a stance on the Vietnam War and various other matters. The debates of the 1960s were left unsettled, though as a practical matter numerous scholarly institutions did issue political statements as some of their constituent members insisted that they do. If the question of institutional neutrality died down along with American withdrawal from Vietnam, it was not laid to rest. Subsequent episodes of campus activism renewed the calls for universities to get off the sidelines and join the activists and renewed the debate over whether such actions would be appropriate.

The debate over whether a university should, as an institutional actor, take an official stance on matters of political and social controversy that do not immediately affect the operation of the university itself has surged back onto the agenda. Not only university faculty, but also university governing boards and state legislatures have taken an interest in the question.

I argue that universities and their subunits, as well as scholarly associations, should refrain from issuing such statements. Such statements have little upside benefit but substantial downside risks. For external audiences, such statements threaten to damage the support for the institutional autonomy of institutions of higher education. For internal audiences, such statements threaten to corrupt the mission of the university and impinge on the academic freedom of individual members of the campus community.

Keywords: institutional neutrality; Kalven Report; academic freedom; university governance; higher education