The University of Windsor’s agreements with encampment protesters and a student group have rightly raised concerns about antisemitism given their double standard treatment of Israeli institutions and impact on academic freedoms. While much of the initial emphasis has focused on the ill-advised decision to effectively establish a ban on agreements with Israeli institutions and establish conditions not required for any other country, there is another aspect that deserves attention since it undermines the university’s position as a neutral forum for discussion, debate and learning. In light of the diversity of views on campus and the desire for mutually respectful dialogue and engagement, many universities have tried to remain neutral on matters of sensitive politics post-October 7th. But by committing to engage in political advocacy, including issuing a political letter to the governments, lobbying other universities, and releasing a highly charged public statement, Windsor has abandoned the widely accepted fundamental principle of institutional neutrality, thereby constraining academic freedom and freedom of expression on campus.
Archive for July 18th, 2024

Law Bytes
Episode 263: The Lawful Access Act Roundtable With David Fraser and Robert Diab
byMichael Geist

March 30, 2026
Michael Geist
March 16, 2026
Michael Geist
March 2, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
Heads They Win, Tails We Lose: What Lies Behind the U.S. Trade Battle For Control over Data
Still Not a Privacy Law: Bill C-25’s Political Party Privacy Provisions Fall Short Again
Could Bill C-22 Make Canadians Less Safe? The Systemic Vulnerability Gap in Canada’s New Surveillance Law
Why the Verdict on Social Media Defective Design Harming Children Gets the Instinct Right But the Law Wrong
Scoping in the Tech Giants: Bill C-22’s International Production Order and the Shift to a Less Privacy-Protective Cross-Border Disclosure System

