<p>I will not address the question of whether the Kalven Report (<a href=“Redirect Notice”>Redirect Notice) is or is not consistently applied by university administrators. I will, however, challenge the idea that building or competing for a Presdential Library must necessarily be an action in violation of the Kalven Report. </p>
<p>The Kalven Report draws a clear distinction between the university as the home to diverse opinions and their authors and when the university acts as an institution to take collective action on a particular issue. Indeed, that distinction is the heart of the report. “The University is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not the critic.” There is, therefore, no necessary conflict with the Report if the university seeks to become the home of a presidential library, which may espouse particular political visions, or seeks to house a particular institute that adheres to certain economic theories, so long as the university itself does not become the political actor. The distinction is an important one. </p>
<p>Just so that I am clear: I am not saying that I agree with the distinctions that the Kalven Report draws, with its implementation, or with the U of C pursuing a presidential library or founding a “Friedman Institute.” I am just saying that I think you are wrong that such actions contravene the terms of the Report.</p>