On May 4th, the 54th anniversary of the Kent State Massacre, where anti-war protestors were beaten and murdered by the National Guard, the University of Virginia and Jim Ryan made a decision to call in armed riot guards from the Virginia State Police to disperse a peaceful protest of about 20 students, faculty, and community members camped near the Chapel. On a day that should remind us all that voices calling for change are often met with institutional retaliation and aggression, the University unnecessarily escalated a peaceful situation to a scene of violence, fear, and chaos. UVa endangered its students, with the police being the sole source of discord or aggression that day, contrary to the claims of the mealy-mouthed statement released by President Ryan yesterday, which blamed students for the unrest.
Last Tuesday afternoon, a group of students, faculty, and Charlottesville community members gathered near the University Chapel, and formed an encampment to demand “disclosure and divestment” from UVA, in conjunction with multiple campus organizers across the nation, protesting what they see as a genocide perpetrated by Israel, supported by their tuition dollars and taxes. Thursday evening, according to reporting done by The Daily Progress, the organizers of the “Liberated Zone 4 Gaza” sent a list of demands to university officials, requesting that the University:
- “Disclose all direct and indirect investments made by the University of Virginia Investment Management Company, or UVIMCO, the agency charged with regulating the school’s endowment fund.
- Divest from all weapons manufacturers aiding the killing of Palestinians, specifically Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics and Raytheon.
- End all financial and academic ties with Israeli institutions, including study abroad programs, fellowships, internships, research and grants.
- And ensure that students will not face any disciplinary action for engaging in protest.”
In response to the protesters’ demands, the University issued a response letter on May 3rd. In the letter, they offer to organize a meeting between protesters and the University Investment Management Company’s (UVIMCO) Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility, whose role is described as helping advise UVIMCO management on incorporating ESG factors into investment decisions. The letter also highlights that following students’ voting in favor of divestment in February’s referendum, members of the ACIR met with students in support of divestment, but does not mention the University’s subsequent negligence to make the scope of their investments known to students and the public. The letter also clearly denied the protesters request that UVA withdraw its’ academic ties to Israeli institutions, on the grounds that the request “compromises the Universities’ commitment to academic freedom and the Universities’ obligation to enable the free exchange of ideas on grounds.”
Most notably, in regards to the protesters’ fourth and final request, the letter reads: “We agree with your final request regarding allowing students, faculty, and staff to express their support for Palestine without the risk of administrative discipline, provided of course that such expressive activity occurs within the limits of the laws and policies we have in place.” Opening the letter’s final paragraph, the authors write: “On a final note, we recognize that this is an incredibly difficult moment for our world. We are seeing disturbing images of arrests and bitter divisions on campuses across the country.”
In response to the letter, the primary Instagram account promoting the encampment, @uvaencampmentforgaza, posted the letter in its entirety, with the phrases “BULLSHIT” and “FREE PALESTINE” written across the letter’s two pages. (source) In preparation for the incoming rain that evening and following a vigil for the 34,000 Palestinian victims of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, the group then began to finally pitch their tents, which had been laid flat on the ground for days prior. The following morning, the University “appeared to unilaterally change their policy on tents,” documented by Intercept reporter Prem Thakker on X, completely removing a sentence reading that “Recreational tents for camping are exempt” from the regulations, with metadata from the site suggesting that the change was made at 9:54 AM.
This timing raises serious questions about the motivations and implications behind this policy revision. Was this change implemented in direct response to the encampment, and if so, why was it enacted with such urgency on the very day significant police action would later be taken against students? Such actions not only reveal the shallowness of the University’s commitment to free expression, but also lead to critical questions regarding the integrity of its policy-making processes. This apparent abrupt policy shift was clearly made by UVa to justify the massive police crackdown on students, enforcing blatant viewpoint discrimination. On the mornings of both May 4th and May 5th, as is common during rainy seasons like these, students were photographed pitching recreational tents to guard from the rain on Snyder tennis courts, as documented here. Curiously, these students, who are also in blatant violation of UVa’s new policy, were not beaten, pepper-sprayed, or arrested by riot police. Neither have students who, for decades, have organized a “sleep-out” to raise money for PACEM homeless services, camping out on grounds overnight in tents. The only difference between these recreational uses of tents and those of the student organizers is their cause–in other words, the content of their speech, which is and should always be protected.
At 11:56 AM, UVA Police sent an alert advising community members to avoid the area near the Rotunda and the Chapel on grounds. By 2:30 PM, officers equipped with riot gear had arrived on the scene. Shortly after, law enforcement gave a final warning to protesters to leave, an unlawful assembly was declared, and then officers marched into the encampment and began to arrest protesters. One group of protesters attempted to use umbrellas to hold law enforcement back, but the police tossed their umbrellas aside, threw protesters to the ground, and deployed pepper spray above their heads. After the encampment had been cleared and students arrested, the riot police turned to the crowd of students who had gathered to protest the aggression and were well within their rights. The line of militarized police officers, armed with pepper spray and rubber bullets, shoved student and community observers out off the Lawn and into the road of University Avenue, pepper spraying multiple students who had done nothing but express their discontent with the police.
Countless protestors in attendance made the clear connection between the chasm of difference in response to peaceful students protesting on their own Grounds compared to the non-existent police aggression when white supremacists marched, unauthorized, throughout UVa, terrorizing and assaulting students.
By 4:03 UVA Police had declared the Rotunda and Chapel area stable, and according to reporting by Fox News, 25 protesters were arrested. The very moment UVa sent out an alert declaring the area stable was the moment that police were assaulting students, aiming weapons at them, and shoving them into the road– again, students who were not even involved in the encampment, but were there to support their peers. As of the printing of this article, it is not known how many of the arrestees were students, faculty, or community members, but regardless, today is a dark day for free expression on these grounds. One person who was detained is being held over the weekend on charges of assaulting a police officer, despite multiple contemporaneous accounts and even a video exonerating her of this allegation.
In response to today’s events, President Ryan issued a letter at 6:17 PM, articulating the University’s stance regarding the encampment protest. Although he acknowledged the divisive nature of the Israel-Gaza conflict that led to the demonstration, his response highlighted a stark contrast between the University’s actions today and its stated commitment to fostering an environment of open dialogue and respect for dissenters.
President Ryan’s description of today’s events as “upsetting, frightening, and sad” doesn’t bridge the gap between the university’s actions and its stated values. His response comes across as largely performative, particularly when the letter glosses over the aggressive tactics utilized by police and instead focuses on the university’s “commitment to free expression.” While the letter talks about keeping the campus a haven for free expression, the strong-arm tactics and morning-of policy changes reveal a different story. At no point was anyone in danger, upset, frightened, or sad until the arrival of the police. There were twenty students in tents behaving peacefully—not by any definition a threat, let alone a threat worthy of a militarized police response. It’s hard to ignore the irony here: UVA seems to find room for tolerance when torch-holding White Supremacists march on the lawn, like they did in 2017, but when unarmed protesters simply ask for transparency and ethical consideration in university investments, they get shut down immediately. When literal Nazis marched on the lawn (and killed a woman the next day), unlawful assembly wasn’t declared until the white supremacists began to assault students, but in today’s case, no such care was taken. Are tents put up by unarmed protesters as disturbing as students being attacked by ethno-nationalists, or is advocating for a free Palestine as abhorrent as screaming that “Jews won’t replace us!”? The University’s hands are tied when it comes to free expression for Nazis marching on the lawn, but when it comes to unarmed protesters, a line must be drawn.
These disturbing images of arrests and bitter division, which university officials claimed to find abhorrent, finally made their way to Grounds and manifested a response that contradicts the very principles of free expression and safe protest the University professed to uphold. The use of force and aggressive tactics not only escalated tensions but also raised serious questions about the University’s commitment to facilitating peaceful dialogue and respect for dissent within our community. Today’s events have cast a long shadow over the university’s reputation as a bastion of free expression and debate, and increasingly, our society should and will be forced to grapple with the ways we treat those brave enough to dissent in the face of similar opposition.
To assist those individuals still in police custody, donate to The Blue Ridge Bail Fund here, as the organization is currently prioritizing those arrested today at UVA. If you don’t want your donation potentially going to bail funds unrelated those arrested today, they ask that you refrain from donating.
The opinions expressed within this piece represent the views of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Jefferson Independent.
If you respect peaceful and respectful dialog on the issues at hand, which is essence of Free Speech, along with taking the responsibility for taking those positions in the Dialog, then kindly tell the protestors and supporters to remove any Masks and take ownership of those positions. Anything less than that is simply asserting a position by yelling at whomever is listening. Why wasn’t that mentioned? Understand some of the emotions, but let’s start with the basics.
Also it is abhorrent that any parents brought small children to such charged events. Is this the protesters version of “Human Shields”??? The contrast to the events in the past and present as regards Hamas use of same is not lost on any cogent observer. As said, actions speak louder than words. That the same tactic was also used at Tech speaks volumes as to how spontaneous this was.
Finally, your Kent State analogy is flawed. People protesting (male) had a real personnel stake in the world events being protested….It Was Called the DRAFT……No one on the Lawn protesting had any such personnel risk. Yes, I understand that idea/event is not readily apparent to most undergrads of today, but it does make a difference in “Ownership” which is why I took the time to write this comment.