A Chilling Encounter at Michigan (Image Credits: Upload.wikimedia.org)
Universities nationwide intensified surveillance against student protesters during more than two years of pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
A Chilling Encounter at Michigan
Josiah Walker, a University of Michigan student and member of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality, first sensed he was being watched in early summer 2024. Police had just raided and dismantled the campus Gaza Solidarity Encampment. Soon after, Walker noticed a white car trailing him on State Street in Ann Arbor. An older man emerged, followed him into a building, stared intently, and resumed the pursuit upon departure. Walker confronted the individual, who responded, “We know what we’re doing.” The university later admitted to hiring plainclothes security personnel from City Shield, a Detroit-based firm, but severed ties in June 2025 after reports surfaced in The Guardian.
Walker described the ordeal as instilling a profound sense of vulnerability. He began preparing his phone camera before leaving work each day. “Make sure your phone is fully charged, make sure the camera lens is clean. Take a deep breath and prepare for anything to happen,” he recounted. University officials maintained that no group faced targeting based on beliefs. Still, Walker viewed the episode as an attempt to intimidate. The incident highlighted a shift toward external investigators on public campuses.
Interrogations Shake Bryn Mawr Students
At Bryn Mawr College, administrators summoned students to confidential meetings in summer 2025. Outside lawyers and private investigators questioned them about peers’ political activities and displayed photos for identification. Willa Hollinger received an email from Dean Tomiko Jenkins for such a session. She later expressed shock at the process’s ethical lapses. The college’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter had faced interim suspension since April 2025. Officials framed these probes as responses to vandalism and property damage.
Maya Mehta, a senior and former SJP member, captured the pervasive unease. “If you haven’t been the subject of some sort of investigation or some sort of surveillance, then you know someone who has been, or you know someone who knows someone,” she said. Students reported self-censorship in political expression. Mehta emphasized college as a place for growth and action. Vice President Samara Sit defended the measures as necessary for campus order.
Cameras and Crackdowns at Swarthmore
Swarthmore College ramped up monitoring with new security cameras installed in early 2025. Administrators dismantled an unsanctioned encampment in September, leading to nine arrests, including one current student. The school permanently revoked SJP’s affiliation. Students suspected footage identified flyer posters, as disciplinary messages referenced specific postings. An anonymous activist noted, “There’s a level of constant paranoia.” Another, Sam, received warnings about flyering that implied camera surveillance.
Vice President Andy Hirsch explained that CCTV had enhanced safety for over 20 years. He confirmed cameras helped identify code violators but stressed support for peaceful protest. Faculty had raised alarms earlier that year over disciplinary processes. The measures fostered discomfort in open discourse. Sam lamented that a learning environment should encourage free exchange.
The Toll on Free Speech and Campus Life
Experts decried the tactics as threats to academic freedom. Brian Hauss, ACLU deputy director, called the repression the worst in half a century. It chilled protected speech and eroded trust, he argued. Haley Gluhanich of FIRE warned that surveillance prompted constant vigilance, antithetical to open dialogue. Students across institutions adopted cautious routines, avoiding political talk.
| University | Key Surveillance Tactics |
|---|---|
| University of Michigan | Private investigators tailing students in vehicles |
| Bryn Mawr College | Confidential meetings with photo identification |
| Swarthmore College | New CCTV cameras tracking flyering and encampments |
Key Takeaways
- Universities hired private firms, sparking fear among activists.
- Tactics included tailing, interrogations, and expanded cameras.
- Effects lingered as self-censorship and eroded trust.
These episodes underscore a tension between safety and expression on campuses. Administrators must safeguard communities without stifling dissent. As protests evolved over two years, the surveillance legacy persists. What steps can universities take to rebuild confidence? Share your views in the comments.
For more details, see the original reporting by The Nation.[1]
