{shortcode-5f6989bd0e6d3dbc9dfc7343f89e8361ef9ed5bc}

To borrow the words of Faculty of Arts and Sciences Dean Hopi E. Hoekstra, University rules “clearly state that libraries are not the place for organized group demonstrations.”

Harvard and its administrators have it right: Libraries are for studying. Not protesting.

In their editorial, the Board argues the library demonstrations are not disruptive and therefore acceptable. In their view, the University should only punish protests they find disruptive.

I disagree. Organized protests are inherently disruptive by definition.

An organized group with signage and symbols “studying” in the library disturbs the normal function of the space: actual studying. Perhaps this form of protest is comparatively less disruptive. Be that as it may, it is disruptive nonetheless.

In quiet spaces like Widener Library’s Loker Reading Room — a favorite locale among protestors — students should rightfully expect as few distractions as possible.

I imagine a student hurrying to Loker, hoping for a couple hours of deep focus to meet a pressing deadline. Such a student could easily find a dozen individuals gathered in Loker with signs designed to seek attention and distract — regardless of whether he or she agrees with the protestors’ message. This directly — and unfairly — adversely affects his or her productivity.

If I were that student, I would certainly find this disruptive. We should expect our administrators to act.

Without remarking on any particular opinion expressed in the protests to date, it is clear that allowing some manner of protest is worthwhile. Certainly, as Hoekstra said, “protests are a normal part of university life.” And I do believe that, in some cases, protests can result in societal good.

But administrators are totally justified when restricting inappropriate protests that disrupt normal University activities.

The free exchange of ideas is paramount to academic inquiry, and free speech and assembly are vital to democracy. But Harvard is a private university, not a public park or town square. Protests should find a more welcome home outside Harvard’s libraries — in Boston Common, for instance — and leave spaces like the Loker Reading Room alone.

I am no expert on university discipline, but the library suspensions seem like a proportionate response to the protestors’ conduct — if anything, they err on the side of leniency.

In general, I believe that while all violations of protest policies should prompt administrators to act, sanctions should be more severe for protests that are most disruptive or have greater adverse impacts on the Harvard community.

Administrators should stay the course and continue to protect University resources — like Widener — so that they may be used for their intended purposes.

To do anything less would be a disservice to students simply trying to do their best academic work, counting on Harvard for support.

Support students trying to study. Keep libraries free of protests.

Ian M. Moore ’26, a Crimson Editorial editor, is an Applied Mathematics concentrator in Quincy House.