When I was asked by a Yale Daily News reporter to comment — as one of the authors of the Letter to the Next President of Yale — about Yale’s new president Maurie McInnis’ announcement of the Committee on Institutional Voice, I answered that I thought that it was an important step. I also mentioned that from my perspective as a physician-scientist, the term “neutrality” was misleading  — taking a neutral position on climate change is supporting those who deny climate change; taking a neutral position on vaccination is supporting anti-vaxxers; and taking a neutral position on racism is supporting discrimination and expanding health care disparities. Based on Yale’s history of powerful and unequivocal responses to attacks on immigrants, healthcare and minorities in recent years, I had no doubt that if an issue arose, Yale leadership would find a way not to be silent in the face of an affront to its values.

It did not take long for my assumption to be challenged. 

A few days later, my social media feed filled up with memes and responses to false claims former president Trump made during the presidential debate. This included outrageous claims about immigrants from Haiti, lying that they were eating cats. His claims, as is nearly always the case, were proven false, but this did not prevent his running mate, a Yale alumnus, from amplifying them. The outcome was severe. Schools and communities in Springfield, Ohio, have been flooded with threats against Haitian immigrants, requiring Mike DeWine, Ohio’s Republican governor, to deploy state police to protect schools in the city and state reluctantly that the claims were false.

This was not the first time Trump and his running mate targeted the Haitian immigrant community. And of course, this was not the only community smeared — the former president has continued to denigrate immigrants, borrowing terms used by the Nazis, saying immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of America, making many immigrants feel uncomfortable and even unsafe.

I contacted colleagues from Haiti and asked if the academic institutions they worked in had expressed disdain at the smear campaign against immigrants. Were there any community events or public notifications of solidarity? 

The answer was universal — no. 

This was surprising, considering the large number of immigrants among higher education constituencies; 10 percent of students are first-generation immigrants, 20 percent are second-generation, and 20 to 30 percent of faculty in higher education are foreign-born — a number much higher in STEM disciplines.

Yale is no different. Many members of our faculty are immigrants, as I am. The same applies to our trainees, to our staff members and of course, to the higher-ups, including department chairs, university officials and many of our most respected and accomplished leaders in research, education and clinical care. Of them, an outstanding researcher, leader, role model and a person I deeply respect, is from Haiti.

One would expect that at this crucial moment when members of this person’s community and family are being smeared and put in harm’s way, Yale would take a public stand. After all, this is not a general, theoretical “political” issue. It is an issue that directly touches on its academic work. But, no statement was made, no public expression of dismay or solidarity — I hope one is coming — but I don’t believe it is. It is possible that this lack of response is an early reflection of the impact of the pressures on universities to embrace institutional neutrality, as the University of Pennsylvania’s did recently. 

Last year, in our letter to the Next President of Yale, which was signed by over 200 Yale faculty, we addressed some of these issues. We highlighted the need for Yale’s leadership to reject faux-populist attacks on universities, to stand firm for free speech and diversity and to defend academic freedoms. We also urged Yale to stand against political efforts to undermine critical thought and independence, and to continue to use its resources to positively impact our society. We ended the letter requesting that the university reject the false allure of neutrality, saying that “taking a neutral position is itself a choice with dire implications.”

The recent attacks on immigrants demonstrate how accurate and prescient these statements were. Neutrality may be an option during times of calm, prosperity and normalcy, but not now, at times when one human-driven crisis follows another, when communities that our students, faculty and staff belong to, are being viciously and falsely attacked. I am not an expert on educational and academic affairs, nor do I pretend to understand the complexities of the concepts of academic “neutrality,” but I do understand collegiality and allyship. When people are vilified and smeared because of their identity — they do not expect their colleagues and employers to look the other way — they expect them to acknowledge the threat, to publicly express solidarity. And this is exactly what Yale leadership should do — reaffirm our commitment to the safety, dignity and wellness of the immigrants among us, as President Salovey did in 2018. 

Yale must openly and directly denounce the politicians who smear and incite against immigrants, regardless if they are from Haiti or any other place on Earth. Our university cannot, and should not, be a bystander to bigotry and hate.

NAFTALI KAMINSKI is the Boehringer-Ingelheim Endowed Professor of Internal Medicine and Chief of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, at Yale School of Medicine. He can be reached at naftali.kaminski@yale.edu.