The Daily Princetonian: November 4, 2019

Monday November 4, 2019 vol. CXLIII no. 96

Twitter: @princetonian Facebook: The Daily Princetonian YouTube: The Daily Princetonian Instagram: @dailyprincetonian

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } IN TOWN

U . A F FA I R S

Federal court of appeals upholds motion to dismiss claims against U. in Title IX-related case

ZACK SHEVIN / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

20 Nassau Street.

20 Nassau Street sold to college-town hotel chain

By Evelyn Doskoch Nassau Hall.

By Zack Shevin Assistant News Editor

A federal court of appeals affirmed a motion to dismiss a former graduate student’s claims against the University in a Title IX-related case.

The plaintiff, referred to as “John Doe,” accused another Princeton student of sexual misconduct and invoked the University’s Title IX disciplinary process. He claimed the University itself violated Title IX, a federal law banning sex and gender discrimination in higher education, during its investigation into Doe’s accusation. The University found the respondent in the case (the student Doe accused of misconduct) not responsible for violating its Title IX policy.

Additionally, after disclosing directly to the University that he had attempted to commit suicide, Doe’s request to delay a midterm exam was denied.

Subsequently, he was dismissed from the University for “failure to maintain adequate grades.”

On the basis of these events, the actions of the Title IX investigative panel, and several other alleged improprieties, Doe sued the University for violations of Title IX, breach of contract, estoppel and reliance, and negligence.

Though the University’s motion to dismiss these claims was previously affirmed by the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in February 2018, Doe appealed the decision. On Oct. 25, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the District Court’s decision.

Deputy University spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss referred The Daily Princetonian to a 2017 statement from the Office of Communications, which noted that the suit “contains a series of inaccurate accusations and repeatedly mischaracterizes how the University handled this former graduate student’s complaint,” and that the University “intend[ed] to mount a vigorous defense.”

Hotchkiss added, “two courts have now reviewed the complaint and confirmed that it is without merit.”

According to the District Court opinion, Doe was a graduate student pursuing a degree in

In Opinion

finance when he alleged he was sexually assaulted twice, both times by the same Princeton student, in 2014.

The suit mentions that Doe became active at the Jewish religious center on campus, the name of which is redacted in the document. The suit also states, “While engaging with the University’s Jewish community,” Doe met his alleged assaulter, a male undergraduate student and a “prominent member of the University’s Jewish community.”

According to the suit, the two began a relationship in August 2014, and the alleged incidents occurred in August and September of that year. After the second alleged incident, the “[p]laintiff allegedly told [the individual] that he did not wish to date him anymore; and subsequently informed certain mutual friends that [the individual] had sexually assaulted him on two occasions.”

Doe also claimed that the individual’s friends “created a hostile environment for him” in the Jewish religious center and “harassed him on campus by using a gay slur and calling him a liar.”

On Oct. 21, 2014, according to the complaint, Doe told Assistant Dean for Student Life Lily Secora that he was sexually assaulted. In January 2015, the University appointed a Title IX investigative panel to address Doe’s accusations.

During the course of the investigation, the accused student made allegations of his own, accusing Doe of “making false statements.” The panel charged Doe with sexual harassment, stalking, and retaliation, and the accused student with “sex discrimination, non-consensual sexual penetration, non-consensual sexual contact, sexual harassment, intimate relationship violence, stalking in the context of human relationships, and sexual exploitation.”

According to the District Court opinion, the Title IX investigative report notes that the panel “read nearly 500 pages of documents and conducted [19] interviews of witnesses.” After doing so, the panel “determined that neither student was responsible” for any of the complaints.

Doe appealed this decision, but it was affirmed by the appellate panel.

See TITLE IX page 2

Columnist Emma Treadway urges students vote this Tuesday in local elections, and columnist Zachariah Sippy criticizes the lack of solidarity in the wake of controversy surrounding Norman Finkelstein’s words at a recent panel.

PAGE 6

Contributor

According to public records, the office and retail building at 20 Nassau Street — home to over 100 small businesses, including Nassau Barber and Jammin’ Crêpes — will be sold to Graduate Hotels, a college-town hotel chain.

Notice of settlement forms, which indicate that a property is to be sold imminently, were signed and submitted to the county clerk’s office on Oct. 23. These forms list the buyer as GPNJ Owner LLC, with attention to Benjamin Weprin, the founder of Grad-

uate Hotels’ parent company, AJ Capital Partners. The sale would displace an array of local professionals and small businesses, affecting locals and University students who frequent the 70,000 square foot building.

According to its website, 20 Nassau Street, built in 1918, once served as a dormitory for University students.

Planet Princeton previously reported that the building’s tenants were told that there would be “no sale” as recently as Oct. 29. The Daily Princetonian reached out to the building’s property management office for more information, but the office de-

clined to comment.

A representative of Milk & Cookies, a popular cookie shop based in 20 Nassau Street, told the ‘Prince’ that she was aware of “rumors” surrounding the sale, but was not officially informed of it until Friday, Nov. 1.

“They’re having a meeting on Monday with the new owners,” she said, “and hopefully I’ll find out then.”

Graduate Hotels currently operates in 25 U.S. cities, including New Haven, Conn., and Providence, R.I. — the homes of Yale and Brown Universities, respectively. The company’s website lists eight See 20 NASSAU STREET page 2

ON CAMPUS

COURTESY OF THE OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS, SAMEER A. KHAN/FOTOBUDDY

At the opening session in Richardson Auditorium, journalist and alumna Juliet Eilperin (from left) moderated a discussion with Carl Ferenbach ‘64, chairman of the High Meadows Foundation, and Princeton faculty members Anu Ramaswami and Stephen Pacala.permenent basis, and piloted Space Shuttle Columbia.

Panelists urge U. divestment from fossil fuel industry at PEI forum

By Ngan Chiem Contributor

Several prominent panelists urged the University to divest from the fossil fuels industry during the Princeton Environmental Forum, held from Oct. 24 to Oct. 25.

In honor of its 25th anniversary, the Princeton Environmental Institute (PEI) organized a two-day

conference, which featured panel discussions surrounding the many facets of the climate crisis and its potential solutions.

During the panel “Imagining Transformation: The Rise of the Environmental Humanities,” Rob Nixon, Princeton’s Barron Family Professor in Humanities and the Environment, led the charge in calling for divestment from fossil fuels.

Today on Campus 8:00 a.m.: Wrestling Princeton Open Jadwin Gymnasium / Jadwin Basketball - All / Jadwin Basketball East Court / Jadwin Basketball Main Court / Jadwin Basketball West Court / Jadwin Track

“If there is no environmental future,” he said to an applauding crowd, “there is no future.”

Robert Orr GS ’96, former climate change advisor to the UN secretarygeneral, said fossil fuels are “not a good investment these days,” before emphasizing Princeton’s reinvestment power as an environmentally conscientious institution.

University spokesperson Ben See FORUM page 3

WEATHER

JON ORT / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

HIGH

56˚

LOW

39˚

Mostly Sunny chance of rain:

10 percent

Monday November 4, 2019

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Hotchkiss: Two courts have now reviewed the complaint and confirmed that it is without merit TITLE IX

Continued from page 1

.............

Doe alleged that the panel acted improperly in multiple ways.

Though the District Court and Third Circuit Court dismissed all legal claims against the University, they did not rule on the factual accuracy of Doe’s story. Rather, the opinion lay out why Doe’s story, even if factually accurate, would not prove any breach of law on the University’s part.

Doe claimed that the convening of the panel was unduly delayed by about two months, showing a lack of urgency. Doe also claimed that the panel did not interview all of his witnesses, did not treat him with respect and concern, and asked insensitive questions about his previous sexual activity.

In its 2017 statement on the matter, the Office of Communications noted that the allegations of misconduct were “investigated extensively and fairly in full compliance with University policies and procedures,” and that the suit “repeatedly mischaracterizes” how the case was handled.

Furthermore, Doe allegedly told the panel he was depressed, “advised two Rabbis at Princeton” in March 2015 about past suicide attempts, and disclosed this information in April 2015 to the University through “an internal ethics complaint site.”

Around that time, Doe requested to delay a midterm exam

in his class on trading options.

Associate Dean for Student Life Lisa Schrayer “denied this request but ‘repeatedly told John Doe to take a leave of absence,’” according to the Complaint.

Because he did not sit for his Options midterm, Doe received an “F” in the course and “was dismissed from the University for failure to maintain adequate grades.”

Doe alleged that the University was deliberately indifferent on the basis of Schrayer’s denial of Doe’s request to delay his Options midterm; on the basis of the University’s “failure to provide psychiatric treatment” after Doe “gave notice to the Rabbis and the internal ethics complaint website”; and on the basis of the University’s “failure to curb the harassment by [the alleged assaulter’s] friends.”

In regards to Schrayer’s denial of the request to delay an exam, the District Court found that the claim of indifference did not hold, because Schrayer offered Doe an alternative: a leave of absence.

The court applied the same reasoning in its evaluation of the University’s failure to provide psychiatric treatment to Doe after he informed the Rabbis and the complaint website about his suicide attempts; the District Court opinion stated that the offered leave of absence was “a reasonable alternative” to psychi-

atric treatment.

Regarding Doe’s institutional harassment allegation, the suit notes that Doe would have to show the harassment was “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school” in order for the court to find the University violated Title IX. The court determined that Doe’s harassment claim did not successfully meet this evidentiary standard.

The Circuit Court opinion points out that “one instance of being called a slur, while offensive, is neither severe nor pervasive.”

Doe also made claims of retaliation, alleging that “[d]uring the panel’s investigation and deliberation, Princeton ‘banned’ Doe ‘from attending’ the religious center, but declined to provide Doe with a no-contact order against [the accused student’s] friends.”

The suit notes that a no-contact order “was something Princeton does not issue to students.”

Additionally, the District Court opinion notes, “the fact that he was banned from the [religious community center] ... is only vaguely alleged in the Complaint; and there are no allegations why this action was a product of retaliation.”

Doe’s claim of “selective en-

forcement” alleged “that there was a bias by the University against male sexual assault victims, which demonstrates that the University was selectively acting against homosexuals.”

The motion to dismiss this claim was upheld by the Third Circuit Court because “Doe alleged no facts reflecting that the disciplinary process and results for female victims are different from men.”

Doe also made a claim of “estoppel,” alleging that the University “promised, in return for Doe’s acceptance of admission and tuition,” that Doe would not suffer sexual assault, unfair procedures, or an “arbitrary termination of his enrollment.”

The suit notes, however, that Doe’s “general expectation[s]” for the University do not legally “constitute an enforceable promise.”

To the claim that Doe’s dismissal was “arbitrary,” the court determined that Doe “identified no policy preventing Princeton from imposing academic requirements for continued enrollment.”

The Graduate School website notes that reenrollment is available to students who have satisfied all academic requirements within their department or program, and the Bendheim Center for Finance website lists one of those requirements as maintaining an overall grade average of B

or better.

Doe’s claim of negligence was also dismissed because the Charitable Immunity Act prevents nonprofit organizations from being liable to respond to damages from negligence if the person suffering the damage is “a beneficiary, to whatever degree,” of the nonprofit’s work.

Moreover, Doe claimed the University violated provisions of “Rights, Rules, Responsibilities,” but the District Court found that the University followed its procedures by “creating an investigative panel and appellate body on the alleged assaults.” The suit found Doe’s claim of breach of contract to be “without merit.”

In response to a request for clarification as to which specific allegations against the panel were “inaccurate” or “mischaracterized,” a request for clarification as to why the University did not take action against the students, even if the harassment only consisted of “one instance of being called a slur,” and a request for clarification as to whether or not the University banned Doe from the religious center, Hotchkiss and University Spokesperson Ben Chang said they had nothing more to add beyond the 2017 statement.

Kimberly Law, the primary counsel for Doe, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The building houses over 100 businesses, including Jammin’ Crêpes, Nassau Barbers, and multiple mental health specialists 20 NASSAU STREET Continued from page 1

additional hotel branches to be built in 2020, including a location in Cambridge, Mass. — the home of Harvard University. Princeton is not among those named.

Weprin expressed interest in opening a hotel in Princeton as early as 2016. In an article published in the Wall Street Journal, he identified the Nassau Inn, located at 10 Palmer Square, as the hotel he “really want[ed] to buy,” noting that he had “emailed the guy [presumably the owner of

the Nassau Inn] a thousand times.”

“The town of Princeton is what we look for in a Graduate location in terms of charm and character,” Weprin told the Journal.

Currently, 20 Nassau Street houses many healthcare professionals, including mental health specialists, some of whom University students turn to for private counseling. Multiple students shared concerns that the loss of these counselors could pose a problem for students whose needs are not fulfilled by the University’s Counseling and Psychological Services (CPS).

Maria Russo ’22 noted that

resources at CPS might not be sufficient for every student, as high-quality mental health care often depends on a positive therapist-patient relationship, which may be difficult to find within the University’s system.

“It’s very important to ‘click’ with your counselor,” Russo said. “I’ve gone to therapists before back home and unless you really connect with them, it’s hard to trust them — it’s hard to be totally open with them. You could go through, like, five, six therapists before finding someone [who] you click with. So it could be hard for someone to find someone at CPS specifically.”

One business owner told Planet Princeton that many of their clients are University students, and that they are “not sure where” they would go if forced to leave 20 Nassau Street.

Beyond the issue of mental health, some students also voiced uncertainty about the perceived need for a new hotel at this location.

Adam Chang ’20 told the ‘Prince’ that he thinks it would be hypocritical of Graduate Hotels to carry out the project.

“I think it’s really funny how this hotel chain, Graduate Hotels, says they try to cultivate and commemorate the spirit of each of the communities

in which they operate,” Chang said. “They say that their hotels evoke nostalgia for, you know, years at Princeton, college life… I think they’re going to displace the actual people [who] hold this university together, [who] care for its students and the residents of the town, and they’re going to replace it with a hotel lobby that has some old photos of Princeton and some vintage jerseys.”

“I don’t think that’s life,” Chang added. “I think that’s something you buy from a catalog.”

Graduate Hotels did not respond to a request for comment.

(if(equal? web love) (join the ‘Prince’ now) (join anyway))

Join the ‘Prince’ web and multimedia team.

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

Monday November 4, 2019

Rich: We need to reconnect conservatives to conservation

The Daily Princetonian

FORUM

Continued from page 1

.............

Chang said the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) Resources Committee, which is charged with evaluating proposals for divestment, considered the question of fossil fuel divestment in 2015 but determined that it “was not feasible and would not advance our work where we can best make a lasting difference, through our research and teaching.”

He encouraged interested students, staff, and alumni, however, “to engage with the Resources Committee if they wish again to raise the issue of divestment.” “[Princeton is] transitioning our infrastructure away from fossil fuel combustion as part of our 2026 Campus Plan and in ensuing years leading to our goal of fossil-free carbon neutrality by 2046,” he added.

Several panels discussed youth involvement in the climate crisis.

“I know Greta [Thunberg’s] name has been invoked many times today,” Orr said, in reference to the worldrenowned climate change activist.

“But there are Gretas all around us.”

Orr argued that many young people feel fear, anger, and incapacitation about their role in the climate crisis, and he urged the audience to support and empower the next generation.

In the same panel, Barron Visiting Professor and journalist Meera Subramanian mentioned the unexpected resilience underlying the anger felt by young people and “communities left behind.” She pointed to young evangelicals, who began to mobilize in the wake of increasingly severe environmental impacts on their homes.

“They think [the adults are] mucking up God’s Earth,” she said, “and they’re fed up.”

Frederic Rich ’77, a prolific environmental author, cited past criticisms that have contributed to the

page 3

Personality Survey:

1) During lecture you are... disconnect between the environmental movement and the public. “[They said] we were too old, too white, too [focused on the] wilderness,” where most people do not reside, he argued. “We can do better.”

He also stressed the importance of a unified, bipartisan front in solving the problems of climate change.

“Climate skeptics unified the right,” Rich said. “We need to reconnect conservatives to conservation.”

Several others shared Rich’s concerns about the state of American politics.

Orr noted that many of the diplomats who orchestrated 2016’s Paris Agreement knew that “some countries would move backwards.” However, “the regime would continue to move forward.” Unfortunately, Orr said, no one expected the first defector to be the United States.

Some panelists suggested that businesses should take the lead on the climate issue.

According to Nigel Topping of the Harvard Business Review, “560 companies... have committed to set ambitious science-based emission reduction targets.”

Farhana Sultana ’96 cautioned against overreliance on the private sector. In the panel about water’s role in the environment, Sultana spoke about water as a human right that cannot be controlled by the market.

“We need a water democracy,” she stressed, “not just for powerful people.”

At the end of the last forum, Stephen Pacala, the Frederick D. Petrie Professor in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and one of the organizers of the event, said he had been humbled by the questions that participants had asked. He expressed gratitude to the audience.

“I know I am in good hands,” he said.

Want to see YOUR photos published in a newspaper?

Join ‘Prince’ photo! join@dailyprincetonian.com

a) asking the professor questions. b) doodling all over your notes. c) correcting grammar mistakes. d) watching videos on youtube.com e) calculating the opportunity cost of sitting in lecture.

2) Your favorite hidden pasttime is... a) getting the scoop on your roommate’s relationships. b) stalking people’s Facebook pictures. c) finding dangling modifiers in your readings. d) managing your blog. e) lurking outside 48 University Place.

3) The first thing that you noticed was... a) the word “survey.” b) the logo set in the background. c) the extra “t” in “pasttime.” d) the o’s and i’s that look like binary code from far away. e) the fact that this is a super-cool ad for The Daily Princetonian.

If you answered mostly “a,” you are a reporter in the making!

If you answered mostly “b,” you are a design connoisseur, with unlimited photography talents!

If you answered mostly “c,” you are anal enough to be a copy editor!

If you answered mostly “d,” you are a multimedia and web designing whiz!

And if you answered mostly “e,” you are obsessed with the ‘Prince’ and should come join the Editorial Board and Business staff!

Contact join@dailyprincetonian.com!

Monday November 4, 2019

Opinion

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Why we should care about local politics Emma Treadway Columnist

At Princeton, we are inundated with messages that emphasize the necessity of civic engagement. For example, the Vote100 campaign urges Princetonians to vote in national elections, with a mission to achieve 100 percent voter turnout on campus.

As of publishing this piece, tomorrow, Tuesday, Nov. 5, is Election Day. Citizens in Princeton and across the state and nation, however, will not be voting for presidential and Senate candidates, who so often dominate the political landscape.

Rather, they will be voting on local candidates and measures.

Becoming well-versed in national politics is admirable; national politics ought to command more of our attention. With a voter turnout of 55 percent in the 2016 presidential election, it is crucial that we incentivize and encourage national voter participation.

National politics, however, consume the overwhelming majority of media attention and thus obscure local

government, a possibly more impactful level of politics.

Before I launch into my crusade for local politics, ask yourself the following: in your hometown, what is the name of your mayor? Can you name any of your council members? What about the members of your local school board, many of whom your city or town elected and who have control over the school you attended?

Now that you have considered these questions for your own home, what about local representatives for the town of Princeton? Though the municipal building is a few minutes from campus, I would guess that few students know the representatives’ names.

I assume most of us can’t answer those questions (that majority included me, until I worked with my city government over the summer).

What little push there is for civic engagement in schools largely concerns the national level. Many of us are unaware of how local politics function or how we can participate. For example, between 2012 and 2014, an average of just 19 percent of Americans contacted local elected officials.

In light of our collective failure to engage, I not only believe that local government ought to be elevated

into the public line of sight, but also I feel that it should take firm precedence over national politics.

First, the work done by city and town governments is often much more tangible and impactful in the context of our day-to-day lives.

Local representatives manage zoning, transportation, and, perhaps most importantly, education. Thus, the businesses you see on Nassau Street and the quality of local public schools are a result of the work of the Princeton Council and an elected Board of Education.

Second, local government, because of its scale and sphere of inf luence, is the most accessible way to make an impact. There is an open door for you to make your voice heard in the community; all you have to do is contact a representative or show up to a council meeting. And your voice can most often translate into an immediate change for your community.

These representatives are much more accessible to the public than, for example, a state or national senator might be. (Mayor Liz Lempert of Princeton holds office hours in the Princeton Public Library!)

Understanding and becoming involved in local politics empowers citizens.

With more people speak-

ing up, local politicians are more aware of the needs of their community. More importantly, citizens can forge real connections with their politicians.

In a time when faith in government is shockingly low, increased engagement in local politics may be a concrete solution for restoring the severed connection between citizens and their representatives. Through my interactions with the Cincinnati council members and their staff, I developed a deep appreciation for their work, and my political cynicism somewhat dampened.

No longer were my representatives distant or opaque figures; instead, they were concrete and personable individuals. This new personal connection with government officials also prompted me to participate and advocate in local politics — perhaps my experience could be instructive for others.

As Princeton students, we should take it upon ourselves to know the names of local representatives and the avenues through which we can make our voices heard.

Emma Treadway is a sophomore from Cincinnati, Ohio.

She can be reached at emmalt@ princeton.edu.

vol. cxliii

editor-in-chief

Chris Murphy ’20 business manager

Taylor Jean-Jacques’20 BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 trustees Francesca Barber David Baumgarten ’06 Kathleen Crown Gabriel Debenedetti ’12 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Michael Grabell ’03 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Kavita Saini ’09 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Abigail Williams ’14 trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 William R. Elfers ’71 Kathleen Kiely ’77 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73 trustees ex officio Chris Murphy ’20 Taylor Jean-Jacques’20

143RD MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Aftel ’20 Ariel Chen ’20 Jon Ort ’21

Don’t whine.

Opine.

Write for ‘Prince’ Opinion.

head news editors Benjamin Ball ’21 Ivy Truong ’21 associate news editors Linh Nguyen ’21 Claire Silberman ’22 Katja Stroke-Adolphe ’20 head opinion editor Cy Watsky ’21 associate opinion editors Rachel Kennedy ’21 Ethan Li ’22 head sports editor Jack Graham ’20 associate sports editors Tom Salotti ’21 Alissa Selover ’21 features editors Samantha Shapiro ’21 Jo de la Bruyere ’22 head prospect editor Dora Zhao ’21 associate prospect editor Noa Wollstein ’21 chief copy editors Lydia Choi ’21 Elizabeth Parker ’21 associate copy editors Jade Olurin ’21 Christian Flores ’21 head design editor Charlotte Adamo ’21 associate design editor Harsimran Makkad ’22 head video editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 associate video editor Mark Dodici ’22 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20

NIGHT STAFF copy Andrew Tang ’23 Ellie Chang ’23 Genele Hua ’23 Isabel Rodrigues ’23 Rachel Posner ’22 design Sophie Li ’23 Anika Maskara ’23

48 University Place Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

Monday November 4, 2019

Opinion

page 5

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

The absence of allies Zachariah Sippy columnist

Last spring, when the Alliance of Jewish Progressives (AJP) was approached by its allies at the Young Democratic Socialists (YDS) and Princeton Committee on Palestine (PCP) to co-sponsor an event with Norman Finklestein GS ’87, the matter was put to a vote. At the time, I was cochair of the organization and, like the vast majority of our members, I voted in the affirmative. As a leader of AJP, I saw our decision to co-sponsor the event not as an endorsement of any particular speaker or political message.

Rather, I saw it as a way to support and legitimize the event. “Fighting for Justice from Gaza to Ferguson: Black and Palestinian Solidarity” was presented as an exciting opportunity for the University community to learn about the concept of solidarity and movement building.

The panel failed in both respects. Instead of being a productive discussion between panelists, the panel became, in his own words, a

“lengthy talk” by Finklestein on the topic of “Gaza’s martyrdom.” It was primarily a display of Finklestein’s bullying and bizarre behavior, paired with the invocation of explicit anti-Semitic tropes (including blood libel, the superstition that Jews ritually sacrifice Christians during Passover; an insinuation that Rep. John Lewis was an “Israeli hack” bought off by the “rich Jews” of Atlanta; and a strange stereotype of Jewish political and ethical orientation). He was not wrong to criticize the actions of the Israeli government and military; he was wrong to do so using anti-Semitic language.

The topic of black and Palestinian solidarity was barely discussed. I do not regret voting to co-sponsor a panel on the subject, but I deeply regret having supported a panel with Finklestein present.

In the weeks following the panel, I have learned many lessons about solidarity, none from the event.

Gathering less than 90 minutes from the conclusion of the panel, AJP members discussed the best path for-

ward. Some believed that an apology was required, others a more limited rebuke of Finklestein’s uses of specific tropes, and others wished to say nothing, finding either no fault in what was said, or believing that what Finklestein uttered was “not malicious anti-Semitism.” Fierce debates took place, and eventually a large section of AJP’s membership decided to write a statement condemning Finklestein’s use of the blood libel trope. While I believe that the statement did not go far enough, and as a result I did not sign, it did make clear that such rhetoric was unacceptable.

Even among those that signed the statement, there were many AJP members reluctant to say anything, believing that it was important to stand with PCP and YDS. These AJP members did not wish to leave fellow left-wing organizations and activists “out to dry” for the invitation of Finklestein; they were devoted to building left-wing solidarity on this campus.

This sentiment, however, did not cut the other way around.

As a result, the only co-sponsor of the panel that has rebuked the anti-Semitism present at “Fighting for Justice from Gaza to Ferguson” was a Jewish organization. To date, YDS and PCP have yet to explicitly condemn Finklestein’s conduct and use of disturbing tropes.

YDS and PCP failed to demonstrate solidarity with many of their Jewish allies in AJP with their silence. In the past, all three organizations have successfully worked together to oppose speakers that “foster an atmosphere of incivility … or promote racism or hatred of any kind.” This description aptly matches Finklestein’s behavior. YDS and PCP’s lack of condemnation will make it more difficult for them to demand that bigoted speakers not be invited into campus dialogue in the future. I am saddened that organizations I once believed to be allies have come up short in recent weeks.

As someone that has worked on this campus, including with YDS and PCP, in opposition to the Israeli occupation, the extremity of its

blockade of Gaza, and violation of human rights, I know that it is possible to organize events about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without inviting hateful speech (whether it be anti-Arab, Islamophobic, or anti-Semitic). However, we can only succeed in this effort when we operate as good-faith actors, uncompromising on our moral-political compasses, regardless of whether it requires self-criticism or the alienation of famous speakers. Left-wing solidarity requires consistency in its opposition to manifestations of hatred, and it demands that we rebuke friends when they let us down.

I apologize for the role I played in organizing an event that devolved into showcase of disturbing language. I am unapologetic regarding the need for a broad coalition that speaks in universal opposition to all forms of oppression.

Zachariah Sippy is a sophomore from Lexington, Kentucky.

He can be reached at ZSippy@ Princeton.edu.

Write for ‘Prince’ Opinion.

News - Sports - Street - Opinion - Business - Copy - Design Web - Blogs - Multimedia - Photo

Like sports? Write for the sports section!

Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

Sports

Monday November 4, 2019

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEN’S FOOTBALL

Princeton beats Cornell, sets up battle of unbeatens against Dartmouth

By Jack Graham

Head Sports Editor

No. 12 Princeton football (7–0, 4–0 Ivy) won its 17th consecutive game Friday night in Ithaca, defeating Cornell (2–5, 1–3) 21–7 to remain undefeated on the season.

With the win, Princeton will go unbeaten into next weekend’s game at Yankee Stadium against Dartmouth, which remained undefeated itself after a miraculous comeback win over Harvard on Saturday.

Last year’s matchup between Princeton and Cornell was a 66–0 Princeton drubbing, but this year’s game was much more competitive. The Big Red held Princeton’s offense in check throughout and kept things interesting until late in the fourth quarter.

Princeton’s offense had more trouble than usual generating momentum early in the game. Two of Princeton’s three drives in the first quarter ended after the Tigers were stopped for no gain on fourthand-one rushes, and the other ended with a punt. For the first time since October 2016, Princeton failed to score in the first quarter, as the game remained scoreless through 15

minutes.

A Cornell turnover in the second quarter helped Princeton finally get on the board.

Cornell running back Delonte Harrell caught a pass, possessed it briefly, then dropped the ball, and junior linebacker James Johnson recovered.

Cornell tried to argue for an incomplete pass instead, but Princeton kept the ball, and four plays later junior running back Collin Eaddy found the end zone on a three-yard rush.

Later in the quarter, Princeton went on a 15-play drive, capping it off with a four-yard touchdown pass from senior quarterback Kevin Davidson to senior receiver Andrew Griffin with less than a minute remaining in the half, giving Princeton a 14–0 lead at halftime.

In the third quarter, Cornell went on a long drive of its own to make it a one-score game, as the Big Red marched 85 yards and nine plays to score a touchdown on a short rush from quarterback Richie Kenney. Princeton came right back on its next drive, moving the ball into Cornell territory after sophomore wide receiver Dylan Classi caught a short pass and turned it into a 49-

yard gain. A few plays later, Eaddy picked up his second touchdown of the game with a four-yard rush to make the score 21–7 in favor of Princeton.

Princeton failed to pull away further in the fourth quarter and committed two

uncharacteristic turnovers with an interception from Davidson followed by a fumble from senior running back Ryan Quigley. But Princeton’s defense wouldn’t let Cornell back into the game. Junior defensive back Sultaan Shabazz essentially sealed the win

PHOTO CREDIT: JACK GRAHAM / THE DAILY PRINCETONIAN

James Johnson and Princeton’s defense held Cornell to 7 points Friday.

with an interception deep in Princeton territory with less than five minutes remaining, allowing Princeton to run out the clock.

Holding Cornell to seven points represented another strong effort for Princeton’s defense, and once again it was junior linebacker Jeremiah Tyler leading the way. Tyler led Princeton with 11 total tackles, including 4.5 tackles for a loss and 1.5 sacks. In addition to his fumble recovery, James Johnson had nine tackles.

Davidson threw for 186 yards on 20 of 29 passing, and Eaddy and Quigley rushed for 95 and 82 yards respectively.

After the Friday night win, Princeton will get an extra day of rest before starting preparations for the biggest game of the season against Dartmouth. Dartmouth looked poised to take its first loss of the season against Harvard, but a last-second Hail Mary gave the Big Green a 9–6 win.

Besides its narrow win over Harvard on Saturday, Dartmouth has been one of the most dominant teams in the country — the Big Green entered the weekend leading the Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) in both scoring offense and scoring defense.

WOMEN’S ICE HOCKEY

Princeton women’s hockey splits weekend games, picks up season’s first loss at Cornell

By Owen Tedford Senior Sports Writer

This past weekend, the No. 5 women’s hockey team (4–1–0, 2–1–0 ECAC) traveled to upstate New York to take on Colgate (6–4–1, 1–1–0) and No. 3 Cornell (4–0–0, 2–0–0). The Tigers split the tough road trip, getting a 1–0 victory on Friday night over the Raiders and losing 3–1 on Saturday afternoon against the Big Red. In Hamilton on Friday, Princeton got on the board quickly after a goal from senior forward Carly Bullock generated from a Colgate turnover in their defensive zone. Bullock has been a scoring machine early on this season, as her goal against the Raiders was her fifth goal in four games.

Bullock’s goal would stand the rest of the game, as the two goalies dueled the rest of the way.

Junior goalie Rachel McQuigge held the fort down for the Tigers, tallying 20 saves to keep Colgate out of the net. This was McQuigge’s first shutout since last January at Cornell. Despite Princeton’s continued offensive pressure, Colgate could not get another goal through on the 23 other shots they put on net.

Saturday’s game against Cornell was a rematch of the 2019 ECAC semifinal, a game Princeton lost in double overtime.

Princeton was unable to avenge that loss in Ithaca, dropping the contest 3–1.

The scoring came in a flurry in the second period. Cornell scored twice before Bullock was able to score again, for a teambest sixth goal in the five games the Tigers have played so far.

The goal again came on a turnover, this time as the Big Red were moving into the Princeton offensive zone, which she took the rest of the way and rifled between the Cornell goalie and the near post.

Unfortunately for the Tigers, there was not to be another goal, and the Big Red responded shortly after to take a two-goal lead. Despite outshooting Cornell 24–22 and winning faceoffs 34–24, Princeton again fell short of pushing more than one goal in. This was Princeton’s first loss of the season, but it will get another chance to see Cornell in Baker Rink on Dec. 6.

Before then, the Tigers will host Harvard, Dartmouth, Clarkson, and St. Lawrence and travel to Union and RPI. Getting victories over the Crimson and the Big Green next weekend at home will be crucial for Princeton in seeking to defend its Ivy League title and continuing to stay near the top of the ECAC standings.

Harvard is undefeated so far this season, with victories over Dartmouth, Brown, and Yale.

Dartmouth picked up its first win on Saturday against Brown in overtime. The Crimson are currently on top of the ECAC and Ivy League standings.

Tweet of the Day ALL THE WAY BACK! The Tigers win the battle of first-place @IvyLeague teams and rally from a two-set deficit to beat Cornell in five!

Princeton Volley (@PrincetonVolley) Volleyball

SHELLEY M. SZWAST / COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

Carly Bullock scored the lone goal in Princeton’s win over Colgate.

Stat of the Day

Follow us

17 games

Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!

Princeton football has won 17 consecutive games dating back to last year