I’ve had a pretty challenging week. Recently, I’ve been tasked with writing a piece about the skepticism surrounding the potential prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey. It’s surprising, considering he’s been a vocal critic of the FBI’s actions. Now, I’m also expected to defend Morton Shapiro, the former president of Northwestern University, who was dismissed as a commencement speaker for Georgetown Law School. I’ve criticized him in the past—he played a significant role in stifling intellectual diversity at institutions of higher learning.
The dilemma of supporting free speech is tough. It means that, at times, you have to defend the speech of those you might strongly disagree with. Reflecting on Comey’s situation—who led the controversial investigation into President Trump—it feels a bit ironic that he’s now facing possible legal action.
Meanwhile, Shapiro’s dismissal raises questions. While he once championed policies during his tenure at Northwestern, like pushing against absolute free speech, he now finds himself on the other side of the argument. His support for speech restrictions was rooted in ensuring campus harmony, but it also allowed for a more limited range of viewpoints to be heard, particularly when it came to conservative perspectives.
When Shapiro was announced as the Georgetown graduation speaker, it drew immediate backlash, largely because, well, many students viewed him as too pro-Israel. The backlash included a petition demanding his removal, arguing that he lacked any direct ties to the university and held views considered controversial.
Interestingly, past speakers who had no law backgrounds didn’t face similar protests. It seems there’s a pattern here—most graduation ceremonies trend heavily towards liberal viewpoints, which leaves little room for diverse opinions, effectively turning these events into political statements rather than celebrations of academic achievement.
Shapiro was replaced by a law professor known for opposing anti-Semitism investigations. In his response, Shapiro highlighted the purpose of commencement ceremonies as a celebration, hoping not to detract from the day’s significance. It was a composed response to what, frankly, seems like a rather impulsive campaign against him.
What’s bizarre about this whole situation is that Shapiro is a product of the very environment he cultivated at Northwestern—where the fear of backlash from students often dictated the boundaries of acceptable discourse. Take, for instance, incidents where guest speakers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement were met with protests, showcasing the challenges of having open discussions on campus.
Now, Shapiro finds himself facing the very consequences of the policies he’s endorsed during his career. This reflects a troubling aspect of higher education today: the intolerance towards differing perspectives. It’s disheartening to see how this pattern continues, where even those within the liberal camp can also fall victim to mob mentality. Perhaps, it’s a harsh reminder that ideological conformity isn’t a solution; it often leads to cancellation, even among those who might share similar beliefs on certain issues.
