April 13, 2026

Recent disciplinary cases at MIT have raised issues of academic freedom and freedom of expression. We note in particular the expulsion of Prahlad Iyengar, whose previous (interim) suspension prompted statements of concern about academic freedom from groups both on– and off-campus (see also: faculty and FIRE statements on the Written Revolution zine). The details of such cases are (appropriately) confidential, but the upshot is substantial uncertainty among students about the limits of and protections for academic freedom and free expression at MIT.

The boundaries of academic freedom and freedom of expression at MIT are controversial, but how to draw the boundaries should be a matter of faculty governance. Cases that bear on, and potentially set precedent for, academic freedom of students and faculty should be informed by discussion among MIT faculty. The current procedures prevent both input and review. Faculty oversight does not require that the details of a disciplinary case, or a decision letter, should be made public. It does mean, however, that there should be a process by which faculty can set policy on academic freedom and free expression and guide its application in the disciplinary process and elsewhere.

We call upon the faculty officers to:

1) Implement Recommendation 5 of the 2022 CAFCE report:

The chair of the MIT faculty should explore how to develop a faculty-governed resource for the MIT community when contested matters of speech arise. (p. 21)

In particular, we recommend that the faculty institute a standing committee on academic freedom and freedom of expression that will (i) promote the protection of speech on campus, (ii) take steps to educate all members of the community on their speech rights (see Recommendations 3, 4, and 10), and (iii) provide a set of clear guidelines that inform the community about the boundaries of academic freedom and freedom of expression.

2) Require that any disciplinary case where freedom of speech or academic freedom is at issue involve consultation with the standing committee (or an ad hoc subset of it) when undertaking an investigation or hearing, or in making a decision.

The MIT Chapter of AAUP can be reached at aaup-ec@mit.edu.

Back to top