Policies that seek to quell protests have drawn the ire of pro-Palestinian groups, claiming their rights are being violated. They are not.

Following a year of unrest and a summer of uncertainty, students across the country have returned to campus to discover college experiences that are devoid of drama and, on the whole, blessedly unremarkable.

Several factors are responsible for the return to normalcy, not least of which is that students have tired of protests that upended their lives, caused them to miss out on activities and experiences they had looked forward to, and put them at odds with classmates and teachers, all for a cause that didn’t hold up under close scrutiny.

But something must be said for college administrations taking the summer to regroup after what can only be described as a disastrous academic year and enacting new policies and procedures to ensure the safety of their students by preventing bad actors and outside agitators from infiltrating campus groups and creating an environment that welcomes and encourages strife and threats of violence.

Unsurprisingly, curbing voices of hate opens the door to accusations of censorship and violations of academic freedom by those frustrated by their inability to spread lies, but their charges are as frivolous as their insistence that in defending their borders and trying to rescue hostages, Israel is committing genocide.

For the sake of providing a well-rounded education with a diversity of voices, most independent colleges and universities allow leeway for faculty and students whose views run counter to those of the administrations. But that leeway evaporates as soon as the voices include calls for violence or racist behavior, whether the calls are subtle or overt. After all, as college administrators, our ultimate responsibility is to provide students with a safe learning environment and anything that infringes on that directive compromises the integrity of the institution and puts everyone at risk.

Need we look any further than Columbia University, where last spring, students were instructed by a campus rabbi to go home for the Passover holiday and stay there rather than endanger themselves by returning to campus? It was a direct outcome of the campus protests over the university’s support of Israel during the war in Gaza, with some advocates openly supporting intimidation and violence toward Jewish students.

Consider the backlash to New York University’s either updating or clarifying its student code of conduct, depending on who you ask, to prevent the term “Zionist” from being used as a “substitute” for Jew or Israeli and not violate the code’s nondiscrimination clause. It’s true that not all Jewish people describe themselves as Zionists and some non-Jewish people proudly identify themselves as such. But no one is fooled by such disingenuous arguments: Zionism is central to the identity of most Jewish people, so when there are calls for “death to Zionists” or Zionists are prohibited from attending certain events or joining clubs, everyone knows who that refers to.

The assertion that it should be permissible to discriminate against someone who supports Zionism, as it is an ideology rather than a religion or ethnic identity, is absurd. Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have a right to a homeland in Israel, not an endorsement of racist or violent behavior or even of the Israeli government. Mistreating someone based on these views would be just as wrong as doing the same to someone who supports a Palestinian state without advocating violence or espousing hate.

Policies that seek to quell protests have likewise drawn the ire of pro-Palestinian groups, claiming their rights are being violated. They are not. Rather, college administrators are preemptively shutting down protests with the potential to disrupt university activities or incite violence, as they did so often last year. Peaceful protests should be encouraged — and indeed, most of last year’s protests against university policies regarding the ongoing war in Gaza were peaceful. Still, the safety of the students is paramount and requires administrators to take steps to prevent any possibility of violence.

As a side note, complaints of a double standard and infringing on First Amendment rights after the University of Maryland refused to allow its chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine to hold a vigil on Oct. 7 are nothing short of offensive. One year ago on that date, 1,200
Israeli citizens, primarily civilians, were murdered with more than 200 taken hostage by a terrorist organization that killed indiscriminately and wore GoPros to broadcast their crimes against humanity to the world. A pro-Palestine group holding a vigil on that day was not intended to serve as “a space for all to mourn all losses,” as the group claims, but a thinly veiled nod of approval for the atrocities committed by Hamas.

Instead of entertaining the grievances of a vocal minority — many of whom are not even affiliated with any academic institution — alleging a violation of various freedoms, real or imagined, we ought to appreciate the way college administrators have learned from their mistakes and enacted policies that enabled a mostly smooth start to the fall semester. It is to their credit that they have prioritized the well-being of their students rather than give in to the constant whining of those who profess to abhor violence, even as they cultivate an environment that allows it to thrive.

Alan Kadish is the president of Touro University.