The Policing and Social Justice Project Condemns the Suppression of Peaceful Protest at Brooklyn College
May 10, 2025
The Policing and Social Justice Project condemns the decision by Brooklyn College President Michelle Anderson and the CUNY Central Administration for bringing the NYPD onto the Brooklyn College campus for the purposes of suppressing a peaceful student demonstration. We further condemn the excessive force and unnecessary arrests carried out by the NYPD.
On May 8th, approximately 30-50 members of the Brooklyn College community gathered to stage a protest in the college’s East Quad. They had numerous banners, chanted, and set up several small tents. At times a small number of counter protestors were also present.
Just after 1 PM, campus security officers attempted to forcibly remove the tents. Demonstrators linked arms to prevent their removal. CUNY security officers responded by pushing, taunting and verbally harassing the students. No attempt was made by the College or CUNY administrations to discuss this with demonstrators prior to engaging in a provocative and poorly planned enforcement action, which escalated an otherwise peaceful event. This undoubtedly undermined the climate for any future negotiations.
At this point, access to the campus was significantly restricted. The Bedford Gate into the East Quad was closed and CUNY affiliated students, members of the public, and the press were not allowed entry and the library was closed.
Around mid afternoon a large contingent of off campus CUNY security officers arrived on campus and were deployed out of sight in nearby buildings. Some of these officers were armed with handguns.
Throughout the event, NYPD officers were on campus but not in plain view. At around 5 PM, a large deployment of NYPD officers from neighboring precincts was mobilized and staged on Ocean Ave. near Ave H.
After this deployment, Brooklyn College administrators entered into dialogue with demonstrators, asking them to remove their tents. It appeared that an agreement had been reached to allow the protest to continue as long as the tents were removed. Initially, the tents were removed, but despite this, a large number of NYPD then appeared in the quad. In response, the students set up some tents again.
At around 6pm, the college discontinued negotiations and allowed NYPD officers to forcibly disperse the demonstration and push demonstrators off campus. Once off campus they were met by additional NYPD officers who used force to make arrests and attempt to disperse the crowd. Officers began using force on students as soon as they left campus causing one student to be hospitalized. Faculty members who were still on campus grounds attempted to film this but were told they could not film and were in the process of being arrested when they were identified as faculty members and released.
Additional force was used and arrests made outside of the Hillel building on Campus Road include kicks, punches, throwing people to the ground, and at least one use of a taser.
At around 8 am Friday morning, the administration informed the college that the campus would be completely closed beginning at 2 PM and that all classes after that time would be held remotely.
On Sunday, the campus was informed that restrictions on entry to campus for non-BC ID holders would continue.
Ironically, it has been the college’s administration that has disrupted the regular functioning of the campus by closing entrances, restricting access, closing the library and then the entire campus, and forcing classes on-line. In addition, it was college officials who both brought NYPD officers on campus to use force against members of the college community and then subjected them to additional force and arrests by forcing the demonstration off campus. This makes clear that the ultimate purpose of campus policing and the Henderson Rules that are supposed to guide their decision making are not there to protect the well being or constitutional rights of members of the college community, but instead serve to enable the CUNY administration to suppress speech based on political content.
The actions of the administration were unnecessarily provocative, endangered members of the college community, and denied them the right to express their views.
We have several unanswered questions for the Brooklyn College and CUNY administration.
Who first authorized NYPD officers to come on campus?
Who authorized outside CUNY officers to come on campus?
Who was in direct functional control of the CUNY officers on campus?
Who made the decision to forcibly remove protestors from campus and when?
What role did Governor Hochul play in the decision to forcibly suppress the demonstration?
Why was the demonstration suppressed when there was no threat to the safety of members of the college community or the general public?
Did those administrators who ordered the suppression of the protest consider a) the disruption to college operations it would cause, b) the potential for people to be injured and arrested, c) the impact of the suppression of peaceful demonstration on the overall college climate?
This report is based on first-hand observations by members of the Project, accounts from those present, and published news reports.
The Policing and Social Justice Project is a collaboration of faculty, students, and community-based organizations that uses research and advocacy to produce safer and more just communities. The Project Coordinator is Prof. Alex S. Vitale (avitale@brooklyn.cuny.edu).
For more information: https://linktr.ee/psjpbc
The Policing and Social Justice Project
On the Right to Assemble at Brooklyn College
May 13, 2025
The Policing and Social Justice Project is concerned that the Brooklyn College and CUNY administrations are systematically stifling the right to protest at Brooklyn College and that this decision is driven in part by the content of the speech being suppressed in contravention of CUNY rules and the legal standards. We also assert that the CUNY rules governing the permissibility of demonstrations and the Brooklyn College rules on the holding of events give the administration too much discretion in denying the right to protest and assemble.
Following the violent suppression of a peaceful demonstration on May 8th, the Brooklyn College Student Union called for a General Assembly of students to take place on the East Quad on May 12th at 5 PM. They posted the call to social media, distributed flyers, and notified the administration via email. Organizers were unable to predict the potential size of the event and wanted it to occur in a visible public location to encourage student participation and raise awareness about their organization. This was organized as a peaceful assembly to air grievances with administration actions.
The administration informed students through social media posts and email that they would not be allowed to meet in the quad and that a space would be made available for a meeting in the SUBO building. The administration said that it could not provide the needed security for an event in the Quad. Students felt that this offer did not meet their needs for a publicly visible and accessible space.
The administration mobilized a large number of NYPD officers who gathered at both the Campus Road and Bedford Gate entrances. At least a dozen police officers were observed. They were highly visible on the sidewalks adjacent to both entrances.
At 4:45 PM, there were approximately 7 uniformed CUNY security officers and a similar number of civilian security staff visible in the East Quad with additional CUNY security inside nearby buildings. At this time members of the faculty attempted to discuss this matter with college administrators but could not find anyone who would speak to them. At this time, security staff confronted any students in the quad asking them why they were there and if they were protesting.
At 5:15 PM, students decided to cancel their meeting and leave campus.
Brooklyn College recently issued updated rules governing the holding of unscheduled events. These guidelines allow for unscheduled events in public spaces on campus. It was well within the discretionary power of the administration to allow this event to go forward within the framework of the existing policy. The administration claimed that the denial was due to inadequate security. But the administration was able to mobilize well over a dozen security personnel for a meeting in an unenclosed space. There was no need for even this level of security for the holding of a meeting in the quad. It appears that what the administration meant was that they did not have enough time to prepare a security response for some kind of public disorder such as an encampment or building takeover. This is an unacceptable standard for deciding on the permissibility of an event that was clearly advertised as a meeting. In essence the administration engaged in a preemptive suppression of free speech on the grounds that it might, in their assessment, be something else.
The administration's actions have the strong appearance of being a denial of the right to assemble based on the content of the speech. The request for this event came from a known organization with a known leadership and a clear statement of what the event was. The administration should have treated this as a good faith request and allowed it. Instead they made a discretionary decision to preemptively ban the event based on fears that had no basis in existing facts. It appears that the administration did not want a public airing of grievances against its decisions to violently suppress a peaceful protest on campus.
It is clear that both the Henderson Rules governing demonstrations on CUNY campuses and the Brooklyn College rules on events are overly broad and give the administration too much discretion in banning events on campus for reasons other than public safety. The language of both documents is entirely one sided in giving the administration reasons for denying events but almost no language that compels them to make reasonable accommodations. The threshold for delaying the right to demonstrate and hold events should be very high. Instead the documents are in essence a list of justifications for administrators to use to deny this right.
When a system is so heavily weighted towards unfettered administrative discretion, it opens the door to content based discrimination. SInce the administration can always find a justification for any restrictions, they are then free to apply those restrictions based on the content of the speech.
We demand the following:
The college administration should approve any future requests from student organizations to hold open meetings in the quad.
The administration should never preemptively suppress a public event based on its fears without substantial evidence that it makes publicly available
The administration should not call on the NYPD to act as a visible deterrent either on or off campus.
The administration should call for a rethinking of its event policy and the CUNY Henderson rules to ensure a strengthening of the presumed right to engage in 1st Amendment activities on campus.
The administration should not bring any disciplinary charges against those involved in the protest on May 8 or the meeting on May 12, and should enter into a restorative justice process to address administrative actions as well as the actions of demonstrators.
This report is based on first-hand observations by members of the Project, accounts and from those present.
The Policing and Social Justice Project is a collaboration of faculty, students, and community-based organizations that uses research and advocacy to produce safer and more just communities. The Project Coordinator is Prof. Alex S. Vitale (avitale@brooklyn.cuny.edu).
For more information: https://linktr.ee/psjpbc