Bryn Mawr’s new protest guidelines have impacted student’s perceived ability to speak freely, according to a survey conducted by The Bi-College News.
These guidelines, as administration describes, are intended to maintain the safety of all students while upholding the College’s policy on speech. In contrast, a large portion of the student body observes the implementation of these rules as a threat to their ability to resist and protest. Guidelines include limiting the space students have to protest, banning encampments or overnight demonstrations, and prohibiting the use of sound amplification devices. Similarly, implications on the honor board and penal action remain uncertain. In response to the new protest guidelines, the campus faces questions surrounding surveillance, censorship, and what constitutes free speech.
The survey requested recipients to insert their Bryn Mawr College emails in order to ensure the responders’ credibility. However, all participants were guaranteed anonymity to allow the expression of unabridged thoughts without the fear of administrative retaliation. The questions presented asked students to share their level of comfort speaking with faculty or administration about controversial topics, their experiences with past protests, their willingness to attend or plan a protest, and any concerns regarding campus surveillance. The overwhelming majority of responders revealed their apprehension to the idea of participating in or organizing future protests. Many cited the new protest guidelines, past administrative interference with political speech, increasing security measures, and a campus climate of fear and uncertainty as to why they feel hesitant to organize. These opinions seem to be commonality across the Bryn Mawr community in recent months.
One survey responder expressed their discontent with what they believe to be administration’s refusal to recognize protest as a fundamental right. “Bryn Mawr admin supports protest when it looks the way they want it to — palatable. But anything ‘disruptive’ to their image becomes quickly unacceptable, even when students are on the same page.”
Other students referenced a prior protest in the spring of 2025 regarding the Israeli military onslaught in Gaza, which began following the events of Oct. 7. Multiple human rights organizations have called Israel’s actions in Gaza genocide, sparking student protests across the United States.
During this protest, students expressed their opposition to the Board of Trustees during their bi-semesterly meeting. Protestors aimed to encourage Bryn Mawr to divest the supposed $5 million dollars it has in financial connection to Israeli start-up technology. Bryn Mawr has said that none of the investments are in Israeli military companies.
Responders also discussed the possible financial risk of speaking freely. One responder wrote, “I feel comfortable being in a protest, but after seeing how admin treated SJP and JVP [Jewish Voices for Peace] organizers, including subjecting them to deans panels without honor board approval, I would worry organizing one could mean losing my scholarship or other opportunities.”
The overall reaction to the guidelines has revealed a growing distrust between students and administration. Survey responders were emphatic when discussing the changes made by President Wendy Cadge, sharing their distaste for administration’s interference in student-led activity.
“President Cadge has already shown a lack of communication and disrespected student organizers by frequently cancelling or moving our meetings, bringing additional admin to our private meetings without warning, and changing these protest rules with no communication or community input,” one student stated.
The belief that conversations with administration will not lead to change proliferated throughout each response. Another student asserted, “Punishing students is not the way forward, and I doubt in Cadge’s ability to have meaningful and constructive conversations with us.”
As demonstrated in the survey as well as increasing campus conversations, the discomfort that has plagued the college extends beyond the new protest guidelines. Students report their observations on the broader themes of self-censorship and surveillance, reflecting the ideological disconnect between the desires of administration and those of the student body.
An anonymous student shared, “They are censoring so much to the point where any action might lead to academic punishment.”
Some students have indicated that they occasionally feel the need to self-censor during academic discussions in their classes; however, this issue appears to be minute in comparison to students’ feelings about the administration.
“I feel relatively comfortable discussing politics with faculty, even if we disagree on certain issues. However, I feel unsafe when discussing the same topics with admin because of the recent history of retaliation against student organizers.” One responder noted, “Current admin have made it clear that they do not respect the honor code and are willing to break established procedures just to punish students.”
Now, students feel they are left at a crossroad between the fear of administrative retaliation and the urge to constitute change in the community. Meanwhile, this dilemma is not exclusive to Bryn Mawr College.
Bryn Mawr Students’ anxiety over the extent to which they can exercise political speech aligns with nationwide trends in higher education. Over the past year, the Trump administration has imposed federal funding cuts to schools like Harvard and Columbia, as well as encouraged ICE detainment of students within the Free-Palestine movement. This has changed the way students perceive the safety of themselves and their voices.
On the state level, political agendas have infiltrated not only what students are permitted to say but what faculty are permitted to teach, with over 30 anti-Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) bills introduced as of May 2025. Although the majority of these bills pertain to schools in red states, it is possible that the current administration could bring such initiatives into federal legislation.
Bryn Mawr students are significantly concerned about this potential precarity. Ris Breskin, a junior majoring in sociology and political science, told the Bi-Co News: “We live in the US, which is a surveillance state now more than ever.”
As a private, largely progressive and somewhat niche institution with approximately 1,400 undergraduates, Bryn Mawr may seem like a safe haven, extracted from the political chaos outside. Often, it feels that this is true. However, as our survey demonstrates, Bryn Mawr is not immune to the climate of the rest of the country.
Breskin also stated, “I think a big misconception right now is that liberal institutions […] are somehow better [than conservative institutions], but they’re not. They’re just less obvious […] Bryn Mawr has become a carceral space.”
Despite mottos uplifting free expression and civil disobedience, the administration’s recent actions, students believe, do not align with their sentiment.
