Emotions are running high following Cornell’s suspension of graduate student Momodou Taal for his alleged role in the disruption of a campus career fair by Pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel protesters from the Coalition for Mutual Liberation. In well-organized social media campaigns, Taal’s supporters on and off campus, including politicians such as Bernie Sanders, are pressuring the administration to reinstate Taal. According to the Cornell Daily Sun, some are accusing the administration, in its prompt suspension of Taal. of buckling to “outside pressure” from unnamed sources, and outright racism
The emotion seems overwrought, contrived and calculated, to this Cornell alumnus. Cornell has numerous written policies covering many activities at the university, including several relevant to this case. The case of Momodou Taal should be fairly straightforward, if one controls his emotions and looks at this rationally by asking himself the following questions:
Q: Did Taal agree to abide by Cornell’s Student Code of Conduct when he matriculated at Cornell?
A: Yes. All students must agree.
Q: Do any provision(s) of the code address the behavior exhibited by the protesters?
A: Yes – Prohibited Conduct: “Disorderly Conduct and “Disruption of University Activities”. These are further described in University Policy 4.23, Interim Expressive Activity Policy Revised March 11, 2024.
Q: Did Taal violate University Policy 4.23?
A: All the protesters violated, at a minimum, this provision:
“Indoor demonstrations or expressive activity may not …disrupt the regular conduct of university teaching, research, business, or other activities, including (without limitation) the activities of groups who have previously reserved particular space”
Q: Did Cornell follow its established procedures to determine the disciplinary actions appropriate to Taal’s violation?
A: Not clear. The Student Code of Conduct Procedures governs the adjudication of any alleged violation and the assessment of appropriate disciplinary actions*. Taal seems to have been caught in the act of the protests, providing proof of his participation. Aside from that, Taal asserts that the procedures were not followed. Taal’s suspension was ordered very quickly, lending credibility to Taal’s assertion. Then again, the procedures allow for “temporary suspensions pending resolution” in cases where “immediate action is necessary to protect…the University community” (article VIII A). In this case the procedures require the administration to consider Taal’s conduct history, including whether he is a repeat offender. We believe there is more to this story than either Taal or the administration are divulging. Until more is known, accusations of racism are premature and inflammatory.
Q: Are the disciplinary actions for Taal reasonable and consistent when judged against the disciplinary actions taken against other protesters, given their actions and roles in the disruptive event?
A: Not clear. It is reasonable to expect the university to move deliberately and strictly following the procedures against the other protesters who may be first-timers, identities unknown, or followers of Taal. It would not be fair or reasonable for the other protesters to be let off the hook while Taal gets the maximum punishment.
The disruptive and disrespectful protest and the ongoing emotional accusations of racism are depressing examples of a disease that plagues academia and has bled out into the larger society: Taal and the protesters tried to bully Cornell into acceding to their demands by:
Ignoring Cornell’s established rules and procedures for dialogue and behavior
Employing aggressive and sometime violent means to disrupt Cornell to make their point
Eschewing reasoned two-way dialogue in favor of one-sided chanting
Invoking Cornell rules and procedures on student discipline, when it suits their purpose.
Resorting to inflammatory accusations and rhetoric intended to polarize society.
We hope the administration will take steps to restore calm on campus and reduce the temptation for further such protests by:
Explaining the events leading up to, and its reasoning behind, Taal’s suspension.
Clarifying how it intends to discipline the other protesters.
Following through on disciplinary actions for all.
Reason, not emotion and blind rage, should govern matters of student discipline.
We encourage you to forward this article with your comments to Cornell officials:
Cornell University Administration
Michael Kotlikoff Interim President president@cornell.edu
John Siliciano Interim Provost provost@cornell.edu
Cornell Board of Trustees
Kristin MacHenry Secretary of the Corporation kdn1@cornell.edu
Sheila B. Grant Administrative Coordinator sbs3@cornell.edu
*To complicate matters, Taal may soon have other rights pursuant to the Cornell Graduate Students United (CGSU) collective bargaining agreement. This is still a work in progress. Currently the university has the right to enforce policies that were established before July 14, 2024. Expect future collective bargaining to weaken the administration’s influence over the graduate students.
Links to relevant documents:
Cornell Daily Sun Article
Cornell Student Code of Conduct
University Policy 4.23, Interim Expressive Activity Policy
Student Code of Conduct Procedures
Graduate Student Unionization Update
Comments