Nathaniel Rodwell-Simon

Protesters rally around Cobb Gate, which they had locked with a bike lock.

On October 21, an unnamed undergraduate student was placed on an involuntary leave of absence and removed from on-campus housing after being arrested by the Chicago Police Department (CPD) during the pro-Palestine protest on October 11, according to the student’s lawyer. 

The incident was first made public in an October 22 UChicago United for Palestine (UCUP) Instagram post describing the event. The student was referred to as “A.” in the post to protect his identity.

“2 Deans and 2 UCPD officers showed up at student A.’s door. They gave him just minutes to pack up a backpack before removing him from his dorm, leaving him homeless,” the post read. “Admin informed him that if he returns to campus, he will be arrested.”

The Maroon spoke to Megan Porter, a lawyer supporting the student in navigating the University’s disciplinary proceedings, about the situation.

Porter explained that the student was first contacted on October 16 by an individual “in the Dean’s office, essentially requesting that they schedule an appointment.” 

“The student, when they got the email, it looked to them like a spam email… and so they just didn’t think anything of it,” Porter said.

According to Porter, the student received no further communication from the University before October 21, when University of Chicago Police Department (UCPD) officers and deans-on-call showed up at the student’s on-campus residence with a letter informing him that he was being placed on involuntary leave.

Porter declined to share the email or letter with the Maroon.

“The deans had made a decision that [the student was] being placed on involuntary leave of absence, and also that they would be barred from campus, and because of that, would have to leave their dorm,” Porter said. “They were given just a little bit of time to pack a backpack in order to leave, told that they could arrange at a different date [to get] their stuff, but they were told that they would not be able to come back on campus without risking arrest.”

Porter told the Maroon that the University’s decision to place the student on involuntary leave was based on the student’s presence at the October 11 protest, where he was arrested by CPD. 

“The allegation against the student is that they were present at this protest, and also that they were arrested at the protest by the Chicago Police Department,” Porter said. “But the specifics about who made the report… none of that was provided to the student.” 

Porter also said the University’s decision left the student “functionally homeless,” as his family lives out of state.

 The University declined to comment on the specifics of the student’s situation, citing federal privacy laws.

In a statement to the Maroon, the University reiterated its commitment to free expression and explained how student disciplinary procedures are applied in the statement.

“The University of Chicago is fundamentally committed to upholding the rights of protesters to express their views on any issue. At the same time, University policies make it clear that protests cannot jeopardize public safety, disrupt the University’s operations, or involve unlawful activity, including vandalism or criminal assault.”

The statement continued: “The University’s involuntary leave of absence policy can be found here and sets forth the bases for its application. The University also adheres to Student Disciplinary Systems, which are applied to individual cases based on factors such as the nature of the alleged offense and in which area of the University a student is enrolled. Student discipline is reserved for allegations that a student has violated University policies.”

According to University policy, a student may be placed on involuntary leave of absence when:

“A Dean of Students (or designee) determines, after conducting an individualized assessment, that: (1) there is a reasonable basis to believe the student has engaged, or threatened to engage, in conduct that has caused or is likely to cause serious disruption to the learning, extra-curricular and/or living activities of members of the community or others, including by impeding the rightful activities of others; and/or (2) the student is unable to function as a student; and/or (3) the student’s continued presence on campus poses a serious threat to the physical safety of any person or property.” 

“A student who has been placed on an involuntary leave of absence or emergency interim leave must promptly vacate University housing, leave campus, cannot participate in student activities or use any University facilities, and may not return until authorized to return from the leave and/or reenroll,” the policy continues. The University spokesperson also directed the Maroon to an earlier statement regarding the October 11 protest. In the October 11 statement, the University stated that three arrests had been made.

In May, several hours after the pro-Palestine encampment had been cleared, protesters were handed cards informing them that their continued presence on the main quad could escalate to an invocation of the emergency interim leave policy. However, no student was ever subjected to it. Before the October 11 protest escalated, the University passed out similar cards to demonstrators on the main quad stating that their protest violated University guidelines and that individual students may be subject to University discipline or arrest. 

Denis Hirschfeldt, a professor in the Department of Mathematics, member of Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine (FSJP), and a former member of the Council of the Faculty Senate, expressed concerns to the Maroon about the transparency of University disciplinary systems as they have been applied to student protesters. 

“Right now, absent this kind of detailed information on why [the University] did what they did, and why they believe it was legal within their statutes, legal within the law… I think that it’s going to be very hard for us to know whether there is some procedure being followed,” Hirschfeldt said. “I think that we also need to know it, not just obviously for the sake of this particular student and other students who might have the same thing happen to them, but also to know whether [University administration] is trying to wrest control of these disciplinary systems.”

Oliver Buntin and Zachary Leiter contributed reporting.