Mendelsohn also suggested that the Faculty keep track of laws that might affect students and reassure students by keeping them informed.

Iuliano said that an atmosphere of heightened fear, not the laws themselves, was more likely to have effects on the University.

“Law has never been good at regulating morality,” Iuliano said. “There is no legal constraint on what one might say to another. This is not a legal question, but [one of] atmosphere and culture.”

Faculty members also raised concerns about potential conflicts among librarians, professors and students.

Cabot Professor of Aesthetics and the General Theory of Value Elaine Scarry, who has been one of the more vocal critics of the new rules, said she agreed with Mendelsohn about the need for clear guidelines on complying with the PATRIOT Act.

“The more concrete we are about the rules, the better off we are going to be,” she said.

Scarry also expressed frustration about the parts of the PATRIOT Act that might require librarians and faculty members to surrender information about students and colleagues.

Faculty members asked specific questions about the legislation, including what the proper response would be should the government contact them and demand information about a student.

Some professors who spoke said that they knew of colleagues who had already been asked for information on students.

Although he directed most of the questions to Iuliano, Summers said that “all people with access to individual records are under obligation of the law to preserve the privacy of these records.”

—Staff writer Rebecca D. O’Brien can be reached at robrien@fas.harvard.edu.