A Message About the Fence and Discourse at CMU

July 16, 2025

Dear Members of the CMU Community,

Yesterday, Carnegie Mellon University hosted the Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit at the request of U.S. Senator Dave McCormick. This major event was attended by more than 900 technology and business leaders who came to CMU's campus for important conversations.

Some members of our community used the Fence to share messages of protest leading up to the Summit, such as “No Trump” and “CMU Community Says Stop the Summit.” Most recently, “Protest the Summit” was painted and guarded by a group of students for several days leading up to Tuesday’s event. They included a link to more information on the group’s position and also invited in-person conversation. At the students’ request, the university also helped secure a safe and secure space for a press conference on Monday so that they could share their perspectives through broader media platforms. The university supported their right to express their views without hesitation. In fact, in consultation with the U.S. Secret Service, we advocated for keeping the Fence outside the security perimeter to allow consistent public access to it.

Yesterday morning, however, the Fence was unexpectedly repainted. The Forbes-facing side bore the phrase “No Rapists on Our Campus,” with no clear attribution. The only known context later appeared in an Instagram post from @CMUfence with the caption “You know who.” After significant deliberation with members of my leadership team, I made the decision to have this message painted over and to take the Fence offline.

There should be no confusion: CMU unequivocally supports peaceful protest, public dissent and the open exchange of ideas. These values are essential to our academic mission and to a thriving, inclusive community. At the same time, the Fence is not simply a blank canvas — it is a physical structure embedded in the heart of our campus and by its nature, carries significant implications for the institution and its 15,000 students, 130,000 alumni and 6,000 faculty and staff. And especially on a day when the national spotlight is on CMU, the complexity of the Fence tradition can be easily misunderstood, and its messages likely to be perceived as reflecting the views of the entire institution.

The Fence tradition has long symbolized the power of visible expression representing diverse viewpoints. But in recent years, it has too often been used to broadcast polarized, one-sided messaging — often anonymous, sometimes ad hominem, and increasingly disconnected from meaningful dialogue. When that happens, the Fence risks becoming less a platform for principled expression and more a graffiti wall — stripped of context, attribution and shared responsibility. This most recent instance crossed a line — not because of its viewpoint, but because of its personal, unaccountable nature, which undermined the spirit of civil discourse that had led up to it.

One moment from the Summit that resonated with me personally was watching Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro and Republican Senator Dave McCormick stand together to call for greater civility in public dialogue. As I reflected on their conversation, I was reminded that universities have a unique responsibility: to model how people with different perspectives can engage constructively, challenge each other thoughtfully, and still find common ground. That is what makes the Fence tradition so powerful when used as intended. But it is also what makes moments like yesterday so concerning — when the spirit of accountability and mutual respect is lost, the opportunity for genuine dialogue breaks down.

Moving Forward

As an institution, we have not always provided clear guidance to our students about the content that will be allowed on the Fence. We have said that speech must avoid obscenity or an incitement to violence but otherwise have leaned toward open use. This approach, while well-intentioned, has proven difficult to sustain. For example, just in the past academic year, there have been five instances where student government and the university administration struggled to determine the right approach to offensive messages at the Fence. For example, during Commencement weekend, a message equated “Nazism,” “Zionism,” and “Hindutva,” which caused hurt and pain to many students and their families during a time of celebration.

Earlier today, I met with the two Student Government presidents to discuss future engagement at the Fence. We all agreed that we are at a fork in the road when it comes to the Fence. I am in the process of reaching out to additional governance groups, including the Faculty Senate and Staff Council, and their input will be critical in informing the path forward. Once we determine how we will proceed, I will communicate again with the campus community. In the meantime, in order to afford time for these important discussions, the Fence will not be open for any new messages until sometime next week.

Supporting free expression while maintaining a civil and respectful campus environment is a difficult balancing act. It requires constant reflection, humility, and community participation. I look forward to reaffirming the purpose and potential of this unique tradition at the Fence.

Sincerely,

Farnam Jahanian
President
Henry L. Hillman President's Chair