University of Pennsylvania – Guidelines on Open Expression

Summary

In April 2024, the Penn chapter of the American Association of University Professors AAUP Executive Committee issued a statement describing what it called the “suppression of student and faculty dissent” in connection with pro Palestinian protest activity related to the Israel Hamas war. The statement argued that university responses to demonstrations and enforcement of campus rules governing expression restricted protected speech and academic freedom. During this period, large scale ceasefire demonstrations occurred in Philadelphia and on or near the University of Pennsylvania campus, alongside student organizing and disputes over access to campus space and the scope of permissible protest activity.

The university responded in April 2024 by implementing “Temporary Standards and Procedures for Campus Events and Demonstrations,” establishing additional requirements governing demonstrations and expressive activity. The standards required advance notice for events, compliance with safety and operational rules, and placed limits on the duration and type of demonstrations allowed. They applied to all student groups and individuals organizing protests and outlined consequences for violations, including disciplinary action and potential involvement of law enforcement. The standards also prohibited encampments and overnight protests, stating that any unauthorized overnight activity would be treated as a violation of university policy. Later that month the AAUP Penn Executive Committee issued a further statement asserting that the university had “abuse[d] the Guidelines on Open Expression” in its handling of protest activity, arguing that enforcement practices were being applied in ways that restricted protected expression.

In May 2024 enforcement actions escalated as police removed demonstrators during Gaza ceasefire related protests in which participants occupied university buildings. Earlier in May 2024 students had established an encampment consisting of tents and continuous overnight occupation of public spaces as a sustained protest tactic. On May 10, 2024 the encampment was cleared after sustained occupation of university grounds including the dismantling of tents bedding and personal property and dispersal of demonstrators following warnings and enforcement actions. Multiple students were arrested for violating rules on overnight protests and continued occupation. In the days following the removal additional enforcement actions occurred as students continued protesting and further arrests were made for noncompliance with the temporary standards. The AAUP Penn Executive Committee issued a statement the same day criticizing the clearing of the encampment and reiterating concerns about suppression of dissent through disciplinary and enforcement measures.

In the aftermath of the spring 2024 protests the University of Pennsylvania Task Force on Antisemitism released a report in May 2024 with recommendations addressing antisemitism on campus and proposing institutional responses related to campus climate policy enforcement and protest activity. On June 6, 2024 the university implemented the Temporary Standards and Procedures for Campus Events and Demonstrations as formal policy, maintaining the prohibition on encampments and overnight protests and reinforcing requirements for advance notice safety compliance and operational constraints. The standards required submission of event requests in advance, compliance with university operational rules, and established consequences for violations including discipline and potential law enforcement involvement. University officials emphasized that the rules applied broadly to all forms of overnight demonstrations including those that persisted after the initial clearing. Faculty and academic groups criticized the enforcement of these measures arguing that they conflicted with existing open expression principles and raised concerns about academic freedom and consistency in policy application. These developments occurred in a broader national environment of heightened scrutiny of campus antisemitism and university responses to protest activity including increased federal attention to enforcement of civil rights obligations under Title VI.

In February 2026, archival analysis of Penn’s Open Expression Guidelines described the evolution of the policy framework since its adoption in 1968, including its role in regulating demonstrations, defining disruption, and balancing expressive rights with institutional operations. It also described the continued effect of the 2024 Temporary Standards, including restrictions on encampments, requirements for advance authorization for certain expressive activities, and ongoing procedural controls governing demonstrations and campus events.

On March 31, 2026 Penn released draft revisions to its Guidelines on Open Expression following a multi year review process and faculty led committee work. Provost communications described the draft as the product of a structured review process with community input and emphasized revisions intended to clarify procedures for demonstrations and expressive activity. The draft reorganized the Guidelines into principles of open expression, implementation provisions, and rules governing demonstrations, protests, and events, and it retained the treatment of encampments and structures as activities requiring authorization under university policy rather than spontaneous expressive conduct.

The draft broadened the definition of disruption to include interference with university operations such as access to facilities, scheduled academic activities, administrative functions, and sponsored events, and it identified tactics such as blocking entryways, occupying interior spaces, or impeding movement as forms of impermissible disruption. It expanded administrative discretion to restrict or terminate expressive activity based on anticipated disruption or safety concerns. It also revised procedural requirements for demonstrations and events, including advance notice obligations, additional review for demonstrations expected to draw larger attendance or outside participants, and requirements tied to security planning and compliance with university instructions. Additional provisions addressed expressive modalities including amplification, signage, livestreaming, and media access in certain contexts, and it expanded conduct rules related to harassment or targeted interference, including disciplinary provisions where expression was deemed to impede participation in university activities.