Prahlad Iyengar, a 24-year-old Ph.D. candidate in Electrical Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), finds himself at the center of a controversy that highlights the tension between free speech and institutional discipline. Known for his vocal support of Palestine, Iyengar was banned from MIT’s campus on November 1 and now faces a yearlong suspension that could derail his National Science Foundation fellowship. His case underscores the broader repression faced by pro-Palestine activists in academic institutions across the United States.
The disciplinary actions stem from Iyengar’s article, On Pacifism, published in the student magazine Written Revolution. The essay questioned pacifism as a universal strategy in activism and included imagery linked to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department. MIT labeled the article’s content “deeply concerning” and banned its distribution on campus, citing complaints about its potential endorsement of violence.
Iyengar denies the accusations, asserting that the images were included as historical references and that his calls to “wreak havoc” were metaphorical, not incitements to violence. “Wreaking havoc is also a tactic of 2-year-olds when they throw tantrums,” Iyengar remarked, emphasizing his stance against the escalation of violence. He sees the actions against him as a violation of free speech, a sentiment echoed by Eric Lee, his lawyer, who argued that MIT’s response should alarm defenders of the First Amendment.
Escalating Consequences and Allegations
The controversy extends beyond the article. MIT has cited other disciplinary cases against Iyengar, including his participation in an October protest against the university’s Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), which he alleges has research ties to Israel. MIT claims the protest disrupted work and created safety concerns, though Iyengar disputes these allegations.
Read More: DeepSeek: China’s AI Game-Changer
A more contentious incident occurred at a September career fair, where Iyengar engaged with recruiters from Lockheed Martin, a defense company whose weapons are used by the Israeli military. Iyengar questioned the recruiters about the company’s role in Gaza, prompting accusations of harassment and intimidation. Michel DeGraff, an MIT linguistics professor who witnessed the exchange, described Iyengar as “polite and composed,” disputing claims of inappropriate behavior. DeGraff criticized MIT for suppressing student dissent, stating, “All they want to do is repress the students and their deeply ethical beliefs about what’s happening in Gaza.”
Iyengar’s supporters argue that his actions reflect legitimate political discourse, not misconduct. The disciplinary measures, they contend, are part of a broader crackdown on pro-Palestinian activism in academic spaces.
Broader Implications for Free Speech
Iyengar’s case has sparked debate about the role of academic institutions in fostering free speech. Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts, noted that while private universities like MIT are not bound by the First Amendment, they are expected to apply their policies fairly. “University leaders should consider not only what is lawful but also what is wise,” Rossman said, emphasizing the importance of campuses as marketplaces for diverse ideas.
The situation mirrors broader patterns of silencing dissent in the context of the ongoing Gaza crisis. Iyengar himself drew parallels between his experiences and those of students in Gaza, whose schools have been destroyed amid the conflict. “I miss being in school,” Iyengar said, “but the schoolchildren and college students in Gaza have lost their campuses entirely.”
As of now, Iyengar has filed an appeal with MIT’s student conduct committee, hoping to reverse the suspension. However, with no resolution in sight, he remains barred from campus, his academic future hanging in the balance. “This has had an extremely chilling effect on speech,” he said. “And I think it will only get worse.”