Students, Administrators Navigate Turbulent Climate at University of Michigan

At the University of Michigan, second-year undergraduate engineering student Jonathan Zou is banned by the institution from setting foot on all of its campuses, with the exception of when he has class or needs to visit the health center. Fourth-year student Oliver Kozler faces a similar ban, although he is allowed to continue his managerial position at the student radio station.

They are two of four people named in a lawsuit filed in February by the American Civil Liberties Union against the university. The lawsuit alleges mistreatment on the part of the school's administration through the use of trespass bans, directly due to the individuals’ participation in expressing support for Palestine. The other two named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit are graduate student Alice Elliot and community member and DoorDash driver Christian Grant. 

“In addition to trespass bans, the university has initiated a whole host of disciplinary proceedings against students and student groups,” said Ramis Wadood, a staff attorney at the ACLU of Michigan. 

The university told First Amendment Watch in March that it does not comment on litigation.

---

As a nonprofit journalism organization, we depend on your support to fund more than 170 reporting projects every year on critical global and local issues. Donate any amount today to become a Pulitzer Center Champion and receive exclusive benefits!

---

Amid ongoing discussions about the role of universities in facilitating student speech, universities across the country have been embroiled in numerous controversies. With national debates about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, university administrators nationwide face challenges as they toe the line around compliance with federal and internal guidelines.

In March, Columbia University agreed to demands by the federal government, following the government's move to cut the university’s funding budget by $400 million. Columbia agreed to place its Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies department under a new official and commit to "greater institutional neutrality."

Less than a month later, the Department of Homeland Security revoked the visas of four University of Michigan students, a decision also condemned by the ACLU.

A statement from the university says it “remains committed to complying with federal and state law” in immigration enforcement. The statement also offered clarifying information and updated guidance about the right of immigration officers to enter university spaces, while also mentioning that community members should not interfere with those officers. The statement urged students to notify the university and document interactions.

“While classrooms are restricted areas that require a warrant for entry, the guidance mistakenly said that classroom buildings are similarly restricted. That was incorrect, as many classroom buildings include public areas that are open to both the general public and law enforcement. The guidance has been updated accordingly,” the guidelines state.

At the University of Michigan and other campuses—such as Columbia, the University of Virginia, and George Mason University—these efforts represent a shift in response to state and national politics.

The University of Michigan, a research institution in the mid-sized city of Ann Arbor, only an hour away from Detroit, is no stranger to student activism. 

In 1970, the Black Action Movement led a class boycott to protest against the university’s lack of diversity and civil rights initiatives. Eight years prior, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. visited the campus to hold talks sponsored by the university’s Office of Religious Affairs. Walking into the central Michigan Union, where many student activities are held, one could easily identify photographs and plaques commemorating those like King and President John F. Kennedy.

Today’s response from the university and the state, though, has sparked debate among students and faculty regarding student expressions and diversity-related support programs.

Unlike university presidents at Columbia and other schools, University of Michigan President Santa Ono was able to weather the controversies by complying with efforts to reform DEI programs. In May, however, Ono resigned from his position at the University of Michigan to pursue the top job at the University of Florida. The University of Florida Board of Trustees named him president, only for his appointment to be rejected by the state’s higher education system's Board of Governors over concerns he was too soft on DEI. 

Meanwhile, Michigan’s previous student body president and vice president were also caught in a storm.

Elected as part of the “SHUT IT DOWN” party, Central Student Government President Alifa Chowdhury and Vice President Elias Atkinson halted all student government functions, including the allocation of funds to student clubs. The party wanted the university to divest from companies with ties to Israel.

That all came down in November 2024, when three articles of impeachment against them were passed by the student legislature. Even though the student judiciary only approved one article — dereliction of duty — that was enough. Chowdhury and Atkinson were out.

Senate Speaker Mario Thaqi was thrust into the role of student body president after learning about the judiciary ruling on Christmas Eve. His top two priorities were managing the campus climate and making the university more affordable for students.

“I'm knowledgeable of the fact that I have a really short timeline and it's a big haul, but I still want to develop an ambitious agenda because I want to—in the short time that we have—be able to accomplish very few things of high quality, rather than overextending myself and getting nothing done,” said Thaqi, who served as president until April 2025.

This was a priority shared by Michigan Board of Regents Member Sarah Hubbard, a Republican elected in 2020. Her current term expires in 2029.

One of the new policies Hubbard cited was the school's adoption of institutional neutrality. The statement affirms the university’s neutral stance on “political and social issues that are not directly connected to internal university functions.” Similar policies have been implemented at camouses across the country, including Dartmouth, Harvard, Emerson College, and others.

“I feel it's very important that we have that policy so that all our campus community understands that their free speech and their ability to talk about issues on their own is theirs alone,” Hubbard said, “but that the university as a whole will not be making statements about items outside of our normal scope of business.”

But some in the community are having reservations about the effectiveness of this policy.

“There's been a lot of very strict neutrality, but also it's very hypocritical in a way because some things they try to stay neutral on and some things they are very directly against, they attack it directly,” said Emma Abramczyk, a senior studying political science and history. “Because they say, ‘Oh, yes, free speech for everybody. We're gonna go for that,’ but then also, they're arresting students on campus for exercising their free speech and nonviolent protest.”

“It’s crazy and unfair,” she added.

Thaqi echoed some concerns while noting that the university taking a stance in any issue would automatically alienate portions of the student population.

“I appreciate Regent Hubbard's hopes that it would damp down campus climate concerns, and I hope that's the case,” Thaqi said. “But it's really about determining if that's the truth or not. And if not, we need to find a different step forward.”

Ryan Ansloan, senior program counsel at Policy Reform at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, based in Philadelphia, pointed out the potential benefits of an institutional neutrality statement, which he says the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has been encouraging institutions to adopt.

“Taking any side is only going to make another side more outraged and also feel like they don't have the support of their university when the true role of the university should be to be the sponsor of the critique, not the critic itself,” Ansloan said.

After the ousting of Chowdhury and Atkinson, the climate remains tense at the University of Michigan. 

In January 2025, the university suspended Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (SAFE) for up to two years. The move came after it was alleged the group had violated the Standards of Conduct for Recognized Student Organizations. The state’s attorney general, Dana Nessel, also charged seven protesters who were demonstrating on campus with felonies. The seven were charged with trespassing and an additional count of resisting or obstructing a police officer. At least one of those charged is a student.

However, in May, Nessel announced she would be dropping all charges against the seven protesters.

"“When my office made the decision to issue charges of Trespassing and Resisting and Obstructing a Police Officer in this matter, we did so based on the evidence and facts of the case. I stand by those charges and that determination," Nessel said in a statement.

"Despite months and months of court hearings, the Court has yet to make a determination on whether probable cause was demonstrated that the defendants committed these crimes, and if so, to bind the case over to circuit court for trial, which is the primary obligation of the district court for any felony offense. During this time, the case has become a lightning rod of contention."

Michigan Faculty Senate Chair and Professor Rebekah Modrak criticized Nessel’s original decision to charge the students. She also criticized the institutional neutrality policy and Ono’s implementation of it. 

The university’s public affairs department did not respond to requests for comment.

“The people who are behind these policies really seem to be very threatened by the diversity of voices that are now on university campuses, both in terms of economic and racial diversity,” Modrak said.

Modrak added her concerns regarding the suspension of SAFE.

“Well, the trend we've seen is that the Board of Regents, or members of the Board of Regents, have really gone after the students, and the office of the General Counsel here has gone after the students,” Modrak said. “We know that the Board of Regents has pressured the state attorney general into filing charges against protesters twice now. And use their political and financial influence to do that. And so they're really targeting their own students and their own community.”

While The Guardian reported that university regents had connections to Nessel and recruited her to pursue the cases against students, Regent Jordan Acker said it was not true that the university asked Nessel to investigate, but rather that Nessel offered to take the cases.