The original statement was proposed in a September report by the Ad Hoc working group on free expression. The report is much more interesting since goes into qu

The original statement was proposed in a September report by the Ad Hoc working group on free expression. The report is much more interesting since goes into quite a bit of detail on MIT's current de facto policies and proposes real steps for moving forward. The cancelled 2021 lecture by Dorian Abbot is discussed. Their recommendation #6 explicitly says that "Rescinding an invitation to deliver protected speech, as defined and explained in this report, conflicts with freedom of expression." . Their full report, including the original proposed statement and their recommendations, is here: https://facultygovernance.mit.edu/sites/default/files/reports/2022-09_Final_Report_of_the_Ad_Hoc_Working_Group_on_Free_Expression.pdf https://facultygovernance.mit.edu/sites/default/files/report... And here's final ratified statement which had only minor edits: https://facultygovernance.mit.edu/sites/default/files/reports/20221221_MIT_Statement_on_Freedom_of_Expression_and_Academic_Freedom.pdf https://facultygovernance.mit.edu/sites/default/files/report... Also there's this note at the bottom of the final statement suggesting more clarity on how this manifests itself as policy could be coming: "Note: A motion is pending before the Faculty to refer the statement to a committee that would edit the statement for clarity."