We have prepared a formal statement to express the views of many Mercer students regarding the recent events involving the talk by Jennifer Grossman hosted by Mercer Turning Point USA and Mercer’s Center for the Study of Economics and Liberty (CSEL). We believe that this talk and the response from the University represent another single incident in a persistent and systematic problem at Mercer. 

The right to free speech is a vital concept that is ingrained in American culture and law. However, what is legal and what is ethical do not necessarily always overlap. We believe that Mercer University should work to protect the free speech rights of students, while also ensuring that all Mercer students feel safe on campus. Mercer’s Mission Statement reads “We affirm and respect the dignity and sacred worth of every person and celebrate both our commonalities and our differences.” Additionally, Mercer’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion’s stated vision is, in part, to “create a culture of acceptance, equity, justice, and access for all Mercerians.” Keeping in line with these statements, we believe that Mercer should not endorse guests who do not believe in or support the dignity of all humans, regardless of race, gender identity, or sexual orientation. 

Many of us feel Jennifer Grossman does not align with these values. In a previous talk, Ms. Grossman called transgender individuals ‘shape-shifters’, made jokes about assuming people’s gender, implied that men need to be talked slower to, made false claims about the COVID-19 vaccine, and joked about repealing the 19th Amendment. In posts on Instagram, she stated that communism should be classified as a “hate group ideology”, despite claiming that the classification of hate crimes and hate speech should be eliminated. Justifying this view, she claims that communism “targets one group of people, productive capitalists, for violent action.” She also has stated that “systematic racism is kind of a made-up concept.” She has regularly claimed that critical race theory and LGBTQ+ movements promote “victimhood narratives.” Discussing what she calls the “transgender craze”, she said that “the hard-left antagonism to the nuclear family and supporting transgenderism is a good way to undermine that institution and human reproduction.” She has repeatedly expressed anti-University and anti-public education sentiments, stating that they brainwash children and has implied that they are breeding grounds for indoctrination. One example is her criticism of “Iran and arab states [supposedly] funding Middle Eastern studies programs at universities.” Additionally, the Atlas Society, which she is CEO of, published an article in which the author states, “not all Arabs are savages.”

Given the multitude of hateful and offensive views expressed and promoted by Ms. Grossman, we believe that bringing her to speak at an official campus event funded by a Mercer University Center, advertised to all students, and offered as an extra credit opportunity was an extremely poor decision that does not reflect Mercer’s values. Furthermore, given her comments on campus, including, but not limited to, discounting Trans Day of Visibility and implying that those who celebrate it are somehow ‘abnormal,’ we believe that allowing her back on campus in the future would be even more unacceptable. We believe her comments both on and off campus constitute discriminatory harassment as defined by Mercer’s own Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy.

Further, we find Mercer Police’s response to the peaceful student protest occurring outside of the event deeply concerning and unacceptable. We find this to be in opposition to the rights of students as outlined in the Mercer University Student Handbook which states that students have the rights of “Free inquiry, expression, and assembly as long as conducted in a manner that does not infringe upon the rights of others.” Although both authors of this statement did not directly participate in the protest, we unequivocally believe that Mercer students should have a right to engage in peaceful demonstrations and exercises of free speech. We additionally find it disturbing that a student protestor who entered the event and made a speech from their seat was told when they were escorted out that they were “under arrest,” despite this being a categorically false statement. We would like Mercer Police to issue a response as to why they interfered with a peaceful and uneventful student protest.

Furthermore, we believe Mercer’s brief public response to the event is disappointing. Mercer administration’s statement regarding the arrest of a student, which occurred separately from the organized protest, does not take into account the context of the situation, nor does it address the despicable response of Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk, Rachel Farmer, and the Atlas Society to the events. These individuals and organizations falsely claimed that the protestors were pro-Hamas, and personally attacked the protestor who confronted Grossman on social media. Rachel Farmer, who was at the event as an assistant to Ms. Grossman stated in a post on X, “POV your college degree is going nowhere so you protest a @TPUSA event with @JenAnjuGrossman Have fun adding an arrest to you ‘college resume.. <clown face emoji>.” The posts by these organizations represent a threat to Mercer and its students. On a post by the Atlas Society where they say that “Police arrested 2 Hamas activists,” several comments suggest violence, including one that reads, “@TPUSA needs to start bringing their own security and announce that anyone who disrupts their speech will be looked at as a threat and will be dealt with full force.” Additionally, individuals in the comments of many of these posts referred to the protestor derogatorily as “it.” We believe that Mercer should have addressed these attacks on students by organizations associated with a speaker who was invited on campus. 

It is additionally concerning that one of the organizations that hosted this event, Turning Point USA, has a so-called “Professor Watchlist,” which includes two Mercer faculty. This watchlist has been connected to harassment and organized bullying of professors listed in the past at multiple universities. We find the fact that an event was allowed to be hosted/sponsored by a national organization that presents a threat to some of Mercer University’s own faculty deeply troubling. 

What is especially upsetting about this speaker event is that it is not an isolated incident; it is one example of a systemic issue at Mercer University, and even more so, within the Center for the Study of Economics and Liberty, or CSEL. 

First, the University’s historic invitation of speakers who express hateful views that go against Mercer’s purported values concerns many of us. These speakers include two individuals invited to speak at Founder’s Day — Erick Erickson and Jay Sekulow. Erickson had repeatedly expressed homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and racist views. Despite this, he was selected to be the Founder’s Day speaker in 2013. When many students and faculty expressed concerns over this selection, SGA issued a statement saying that “we stand by his selection as a Founder’s Day speaker.” Then, in 2018 Jay Sekulow was invited as the Founder’s Day speaker despite repeated advocacy against the rights of women, Muslims, and LGBTQ+ individuals. Once again, a multitude of students and faculty protested this decision, including a then-SGA senator who wrote an opinion article detailing how Sekulow’s selection went against Mercer’s values. Despite this, Sekulow remained the Founder’s Day speaker and was once again supported by SGA.

An even more concentrated problem exists within the CSEL, which is the body that co-sponsored Ms. Grossman’s appearance on campus. This center has sponsored and hosted a speaker series with various speakers who have expressed problematic and hateful views. For example, Bryan Caplan, who spoke in 2019, wrote an opinion stating that “lower class teens … don’t have bright future to sacrifice, so why wait to become a teen parent.” He also made statements against women’s and LGBTQ+ rights, which included trivializing sexual harassment. Another speaker, Judith Miller, expressed racist views and advocated for sexual abusers and those who engage in blackface to have their work promoted in the public eye. 

What makes these problems so much more disturbing is that one of the problematic speakers the center has had is the head of the center itself, Dr. Saravia, a professor at Mercer. He participated in a debate as part of the CSEL’s lecture series in which he claimed that systemic racism no longer exists and that police profiling is not only justified, but good. Specifically, he said that profiling is justified because black Americans engage in more crime, which he attributed solely to “the disintegration of the nuclear family.” Dr. Saravia’s comments at this event induced a major response from Mercer students and faculty. However, the only response of the University was to hold another event in which Dr. Saravia repeated many of his false and hateful claims and discounted the experiences of black students and faculty. Despite this, no further action was taken.

We find this trend of hateful speakers being invited to campus especially concerning given the tendency of the Mercer administration to intervene in events related to LGBTQ+ visibility and culture. One instance of note is the intervention of administration in a drag show event being planned by QuadWorks last semester. An anonymous member of the Quadworks team provided the following statement regarding this incident: “in 2023 as the fall events were being planned out, a drag show was proposed as a part of our National Coming Out Day event, which had been previously requested by students to be brought to our campus. Within a day of this proposal, our board was recommended to alter this event, in an attempt to prevent potential retaliation and cancellation by the administration.” We think that it is hypocritical that the administration is willing to censor or cancel a harmless event that many students requested and were looking forward to, but are unwilling to monitor the speakers who are selected to come to campus or make a comment on their hateful rhetoric.

Given the recent events involving Ms. Grossman and the historical issues involving hateful and offensive speakers on campus, we made the following 5 requests.

1. That Mercer University administration review the response of the University and Mercer Police to the peaceful protest of the event on Thursday, April 4, 2024.
2. That Mercer University publish an official statement addressing the transphobic and racist views of Ms. Grossman and condemning the response of the Atlas Society, Turning Point USA, and Charlie Kirk, and/or a statement that affirms Mercer University’s support of transgender people and people of color.
3. That SGA make an official statement to the same effect.
4. That the speaker selection process of the University be reviewed and amended to ensure that those who are selected to speak at official Mercer events, such as Founders’ Day, fit with Mercer’s values and mission.
5. Most importantly, that peaceful protests be allowed to happen in the future when they pose no direct threat to students, faculty, or guests, and when they do not hinder the operation of the University.

We delivered a very similar iteration of the preceding statement (with some edits made to shorten it for time) to SGA on April 15, 2024. The present statement includes some further comments made by Ms. Grossman and some posts and comments from social media that were not included in the delivered statement. Some pieces of additional information were added and minor changes in wording were made throughout. Additionally, the final paragraph of the delivered statement specifically addressed to SGA was removed and replaced by this and the following paragraph. 

We would like to finally affirm that this is not a political statement and that we believe nothing addressed in this statement is a political issue. We respect the right of anyone to express differing views. However, we believe that espousing hateful rhetoric is entirely separate from a person’s economic or political views. There have been several speakers in the past who held the same economic, philosophical, and political views as those of the speakers mentioned here. The fundamental difference is that these speakers, whom we have no issue with being on campus, have not made hateful, derogatory, and harmful comments about communities present on Mercer’s campus. We finally would like to restate our absolute belief in the right of all students to engage in peaceful protests and demonstrations.

 

Signed,

Matthew Simmerman                                          Tori/Forrest Glazier (they/he)

Author                                                                  Author