March 28, 2017

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Tuesday March 28, 2017 vol. CXLI no. 30

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } U . A F FA I RS

NICHOLAS WU :: ASSOCIATE OPINION EDITOR

Members of the University community assembled on Monday for a lively meeting of the Council of the Princeton University Community. The meeting discussed, among other matters, the CPUC Resource Committee’s decision to reject a student proposal to divest from private prisons.

PPPD stages walkout during CPUC meeting staff writer

Princeton Private Prison Divestment held a walkout and rally today at the Council of the Princeton University Community meeting. The protest was in response to the CPUC Resource Committee’s announcement of their decision to reject PPPD’s proposal that the University divest from private prisons.

The 22-page divestment proposal stated that the University “has clear reasons to move forward with divesting and disassociating from corporations that draw profit from incarceration, drug control and immigrant deportation policies.” It included a list of corporations from which the University should divest.

Yet, the University Resources

Committee decided in a March 10 meeting that “the proposal, in its current form, did not meet the high bar to recommend action,” according to the committee chair, University Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Michael Littman.

According to University President Christopher Eisgruber ‘83, the University does not have direct holdings or investments in private prisons. However, it may own aggregate funds or mutual funds that invest in private prisons indirectly — it is this possibility that PPPD opposes.

PPPD stated in a Monday press release that it would “publicly reject the legitimacy of the decision.”

“At this point, we have no option but to continue the campaign on our own terms and ask that the

U . A F FA I R S

University act in accordance with the demands of its constituents and its own articulated standards and values,” a campaign spokesperson stated in the press release.

Eisgruber began the discussion in the CPUC meeting by stating that the University does not normally reveal what is in its investment portfolio.

“I can tell you that we do not hold investments in the companies that are the current subject of this petition,” he said. “There is no intention to invest in those companies.”

Today was the first time the University has specifically stated that it does not have holdings in private prisons; the University normally does not discuss what PRINCO, the firm that manages the endowment, invests in.

Eisgruber said that the question

before the Resources Committee was whether to place a “filter” preventing future investments in forprofit prison companies.

Littman then formally presented the committee’s decision not to pass the proposal onto the University Board of Trustees, which has the authority to make divestment decisions.

“All [eight committee members] came to the same conclusion. All of us had different reasons,” he said. “The reasons we’re going to put together is going to be the basis of our report that will come forth at the end of May.” The committee’s next two meetings will deal with producing complete feedback on the proposal, Littman said.

“We felt that the proposal that was on the table was incomplete, and that further evidence was

BEYOND THE BUBBLE

CPUC meeting addresses U. prof. Falk blocked town-gown relationship from lecturing in UK

By Jackson Caputo contributor

At the Council of the Princeton University Community meeting, the University’s agenda included addressing concerns surrounding its investments with its endowment, the Princeton University Investment Company, and the University’s relationship with the town.

Members of the committee addressed a packed room, many of whom were anticipating debate over the University endowment’s possible investment in private prisons.

In describing the University’s relationship with the town, Vice President and Secretary of the University Bob Durkee ’69 said the University donates more than $22 million to the community. In his remarks, Durkee explained that in 2014, the University committed to donating $22 million over seven years, and has donated $3.09 million so far this year.

The University focuses on donating to public aid programs such as emergency services, the Princeton Public Library, and education. For example, University students and faculty help make up the all-volunteer firefighting force in the town. Additionally, when the Princeton Public School system renovated their school library, the University donated a half million dollars.

The University also contributes millions of dollars annually both directly and indirectly to the local community, Durkee explained. Many University-owned properties are tax exempt — an issue that was the subject of a lawsuit

last year. The University pays $9.18 million in property taxes every year, of which $5.68 million are on tax exempt properties, Durkee said. These taxes indirectly contribute to the roughly $60 million annual budget of the Borough of Princeton.

The University’s donations include $500,000 each for an emergency services facility and a firefighting apparatus. In addition to donating money, the University keeps two emergency vehicles on campus so that 20-30 student volunteer EMTs, about 50-60 percent of Princeton’s total number of volunteer EMTs, can back up the Township’s EMTs in situations with multiple injuries. Sending student EMTs is at least 10 minutes faster than waiting for West Windsor EMTs, which helps to minimize the drain on county resources, enabling the county to answer more calls.

The University’s support for the public library enables wider program offerings.

“If you ask at a library outside of Princeton [what Princeton Public Library is known for], they will say programs, and that has everything to do with our partnership with the University,” said Princeton Public Library Director Brett Bonfield.

A new partnership between the University and the library involves the Princeton Environmental Film Festival, associated with the Princeton Environmental Institute and program on Gender and Sexuality Studies, which premiered last night. For the first time in its 11-year existence, the Princeton Environmental See CPUC page 3

By Abhiram Karuppur associate news editor

University Professor Emeritus of International Law and Practice Richard Falk was blocked from lecturing in two universities in the United Kingdom after co-authoring a report calling Israel an “apartheid” regime.

Middlesex University and the University of East London called off Falk’s lectures, with Middlesex cancelling due to “health and safety concerns,” and the University of East London claiming that Falk did not have proper approval to speak.

Criticism of Falk stems from his time serving as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on “the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967,” a position he held from 2008 to 2014.

After his election to the post in 2008, Falk was initially denied a visa to Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip by the Israeli government, following comments he made that Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to the atrocities committed by the Nazis in Europe.

Since then, Falk has criticized Israel’s strikes on Gaza in December 2008, and in 2010 he published a report detailing the “most salient apartheid features of the Israeli occupation,” including preferential citizenship for Jews over Palestinians, “punitive house demolitions,” and “discriminatory arrangements” for traveling from the West Bank to Jerusalem.

Falk’s final report in 2013 called for an investigation by the United Nations into Israel’s treatment of Palestinian prisoners, citing instances of arbitrary detention, torture, and

coerced confessions.

In 2017, Falk co-authored a report along with the Economic and Social Commission on Western Asia, comprised of 18 Arab countries, which again accused Israel of “apartheid.” This report was withdrawn from the UN’s webpage

by Secretary General Antonio Guterres after global criticism, notably from the United States and Israel.

In an interview with the news organization Middle East Eye, Falk noted that his report only represented the opinion of the individuals writing the report, not that of the United Nations. He also added that the report was not as controversial as his critics make it out to appear. “[The report] looks at the contention of apartheid as applicable to the Palestinian people as a whole, and not just those living under occupation,” he said. “This means including refugees, involuntary exiles, the minority in Israel, and residents of Jerusalem within a coherent overall structure of systematic discriminatory domination.”

“The United States stands with our ally Israel and will continue to oppose biased and anti-Israel actions across the UN system and around the world,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said in a statement. “The United Nations Secretariat was right to distance itself from this report, but it must go further and withdraw the report altogether.”

UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights organization, further called for the United Kingdom to expel Falk for his See FALK page 3

In Opinion

Today on Campus

Contributor Hayley Siegel argues that students shouldn’t rip up The Princeton Tory, and Kaveh Badrei writes in favor of a united Europe. PAGE 4

7:30 p.m.: Steve Lehman’s selebeyone - jazz performance at Taplin Auditorium.

needed,” he added.

Guidelines for divestment adopted by the Trustees in 1997 maintain that, “considerable, thoughtful, and sustained interest on campus” and “consensus on how the University should respond to the situation” are required for divestment, taking into account “the magnitude, scope and representativeness of the expressions of campus opinion.”

According to Littman, the University has previously divested in two cases: one investment was related to apartheid in South Africa in 1987, the other to genocide in Darfur in 2006.

Recent divestment proposals have dealt with Israel, the Princeton Sustainable Investment Initiative, and gun manufacturers, Littman said. “All three of these See PPPD page 4

STUDENT LIFE

PAJ to send Eisgruber anti-travel ban petition

By Catherine Benedict contributor

On Mar. 27, Princeton Advocates for Justice, an “intersectional undergraduate student coalition of 25 Princeton University student groups advocating for the advancement of basic human rights” that formed in the wake of President Donald Trump’s election, released a letter signed by 32 student groups and 600 members of the University community urging University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 to officially oppose Trump’s newest executive order barring entry to citizens of six Middle Eastern countries and limiting refugee entrance.

400 undergraduates, 92 graduate students, 51 faculty members, 7 post-docs, and 17 staff members signed the online petition to oppose President Trump’s executive orders, and additionally urged the University to join the “Every Campus a Refuge” network. Members of this network sponsor a refugee family by partnering with a local resettlement agency.

Eisgruber previously led 47 other college and university presidents by drafting a letter sent to President Trump, urging him to “rectify or rescind” his Jan. 27 executive order forbidding entry into the U.S. by travelers from Iraq, Sudan, Iran, Somalia, Libya, and Yemen for 90 days and from Syria indefinitely. Trump’s second travel ban, signed March 6 and meant to take effect March 16, bans people from Sudan, Iran, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, and LibSee PAJ page 3

WEATHER

By Audrey Spensley

HIGH

61˚

LOW

48˚

Rainy. chance of rain:

40 percent

Opinion

Tuesday March 28, 2017

page 2

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

A united Europe Kaveh Brahei columnist

On March 9, the University’s Liechtenstein Institute on SelfDetermination hosted a lunch seminar with former Prime Minister of Portugal and former President of the EU Commission José Manuel Barroso. Prime Minister Barroso’s speech highlighted the need, in the face of increased nationalism around the world, for a renewed confidence and investment in the European Union. The EU and any such supranational organization only flourishes, Barasso said, when its memberstates take pride in such international cooperation and embrace the nature of the institution.

The United Nations is constantly criticized for its supposed ineffectiveness, sprawling bureaucratic organization, and lack of cohesiveness. Now, it seems that the European Union is the next target for anti-globalization forces. In light of this threat, we have to protect and defend the European Union as the unifying, effective, and powerful body that it truly is. Without it, Europe would surely be in a more disorderly state of affairs.

Last year’s Brexit decision opened a Pandora’s box of criti-

cism of the European Union. The nationalist “Leave” camp began a wave of populism that carried far-reaching effects to the United States, France, and the Netherlands. Marine Le Pen of France’s National Front and Geert Wilders of the Party of Freedom in the Netherlands ground this idea of populism in reality. Wilders ran, and LePen is running, an intensely populist campaign, with heated rhetoric and far-right calls for change. Both have called for a withdrawal from the European Union. Though Wilders was narrowly defeated, LePen’s chance of victory is not outside the realm of possibility, especially after the populist surprises of 2016.

A LePen victory in France would raise the alarm for the European Union and supporters of the institution. Riding the Brexit wave, the populists of the Front National promised throughout LePen’s campaign that, if elected, they would hold a popular referendum to decide the future of France in the EU. A successful leave campaign would turn Britain’s individual departure into a trend, and would endanger the strength of the EU overall. But Europe, and indeed the world, needs the EU, and a French departure would be a mistake.

The European Union, much like the United Nations, stands as a forum for community, dialogue, and cooperation within the global stage. Its emphasis on the openness and interplay of European countries with one another is a testament to the sort of collaboration and discourse that should and must occur in our new and changing world.

Economically, the EU is the largest trade block in the world, allowing for the free flow of both peoples and goods without the existence of extensive regional barriers. This is one of features that makes the bloc so beneficial to its members, but the divestment of country after country from the intergovernmental agreement would render it economically ineffective. Politically speaking, supranational groups such as the EU only function when participation and membership are involved and inclusive.

Without the full participation of dominant member states, it seems that the European Union could face the same fate as the short-lived League of Nations from the post-World War I period.

To survive this crisis of faith and to weather the storm of nationalism, we need strong

vol. cxli

leadership to renew faith in the mechanisms that allow for international cooperation and dialogue. We need to highlight the benefits of the EU, and emphasize how it helps to solve the problems and crises of our times. Shifting more attention towards the EU and giving it credit for what it achieves will clarify how the organization operates and rebut the cries of inefficiency from the far-right.

The European Union, much like the United Nations, stands as a symbol of what global cooperation can look like. So much of what we hear on the news discusses the conflicts and arguments between individual countries, and in this individualistic worldview, it can be hard and nearly impossible to see much hope of reconciliation or progress. But by observing a collection of countries engaged in common dialogue with one another in the hopes of achieving a singular goal, we can almost get a renewed sense of faith that things will be alright, that the global community can prevail no matter what sort of problem presents itself.

Kaveh Badrei is a freshman from Houston, Texas. He can be reached at kbadrei@princeton.edu.

Riddle me this

Sarah Sakha ’18

editor-in-chief

Matthew McKinlay ’18 business manager

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 Gregory L. Diskant ’70 William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 Joshua Katz Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Randall Rothenberg ’78 Annalyn Swan ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73

141ST MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Garfinkle ’19 Grace Rehaut ’18 Christina Vosbikian ’18

Anne zou ’19

..................................................

Head news editor Marcia Brown ’19 news editors Abhiram Karuppur ’19 opinion editor Newby Parton ‘18 sports editor David Xin ‘19 street editor Jianing Zhao ‘20 photography editor Rachel Spady ‘18 web editor David Liu ‘18 chief copy editors Isabel Hsu ‘19 Omkar Shende ‘18 chief design editor Quinn Donohue ‘20 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 Nicholas Wu ’18 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Claire Coughlin ’19 associate street editor Andie Ayala ‘19 Catherine Wang ’19

Hayley Siegel

Don’t tear up the Tory

contributing columnist

A few weeks ago, my family called and asked if I planned to watch the President’s joint address to Congress. I told them that I didn’t, and framed my nonparticipation as an act of political dissent. I said I wasn’t going to dignify Trump by giving him my attention. But the truth is, I had forgotten that the speech was even scheduled, having been so bogged down with other stresses and demands.

When I hung up, I turned to face the work that was waiting for me on my desk: a lab report, two reading assignments, a writing seminar essay, and an unfinished article.

These tasks would soon be due, and I knew that anything noteworthy that came of Trump’s speech could be found online later. I justified my political apathy as a form of passive protest that was in some way contributing to the goals of the antiTrump movement while allowing me to finish my economics reading for the next day’s lecture.

Later that night, the Princeton Tory arrived under our door. My roommates’ liberal Pavlovian response, upon reading just the cover, was to grimace at the word “conservative”. They made me, the least politicized of my suite, rip the publication in two and toss its halves in the trash can. After doing this, I asked if they were going to watch Trump’s address, but

it turned out that my roommates had forgotten too. Our indignant reaction to the Tory, that only a minute ago seemed so valid and heartfelt, retreated as suddenly as it appeared. Who were we to criticize someone else for making a bold and informed statement about their own political beliefs, if we were not even willing to inform ourselves? If we did not even know what we were in opposition to, and what exactly Trump’s policies actually were, then how could we have anything substantive to say against them?

By not actively studying Trump’s modus operandi and trying to subvert it with intelligent strategies, we are allowing him to gain steam.

His populist platform feeds into the disaffection of right-wing conservatives during the Obama years and creates a strong ideological front to back him. The anti-Trump camp remains too broadly defined, scattered among Bernie leftists, Hillary supporters, and moderate conservatives. If politics were a game of chess, then Trump, with his solid army of core backers, has had the opportunity to pull another check mate. Despite setbacks, he will keep barreling ahead, deflecting opposition so long as our dissent remains fractured and lacks any unified, informed argument against him.

Knowing Trump’s next move has, for liberals, become the intellectual equivalent of learning a jeopardy fact. It’s interesting, and sometimes

manages to up the shock value of whatever happened the prior week, but otherwise seems completely useless given our level of political engagement and awareness.

We have been unsuccessful in attacking his policies not for a lack of flaws, but, on the contrary, because most of our understanding of his platform has been funneled through the entertaining yet highly subjective comedic acts of Alec Baldwin and Lorne Michaels. In some ways, we are no better than Trump himself — we don’t bother to study the empirical facts. Instead, we speak in blanket generalizations and alternatives, about feelings and fears rather than actualities, to hide our ignorance.

Our moral relativism decides in caveman logic that Trump is bad and Obama is good; it shouldn’t be lauded because it doesn’t help the pushback against Trump. It only results in our inability to make critical decisions and nuanced statements about the current state of American politics. Ultimately, our general ignorance, coupled with broad rhetoric that’s too often more anti-Republican than antiTrump, is fueling this collective sense of disaffection among young Liberals by failing to have any impact on Trump.

The lives of most Princetonians are more adversely affected by a low grade on a problem set than a racially or religiously motivated

travel ban. We are submerged in an ironic solipsism, an obsession with the academic and social pressure of Princeton that shields us from the harsh realities of the real world. Our protection from, and ignorance of, these harsh realities causes us to evolve into the very under-informed, pseudo-intellectual yuppies that we like to criticize.

We need to consider why we are here in the first place, beyond problem sets and tests. Are we not attending one of the top institutions in America so that we can meaningfully engage this world? To contribute, we need to be informed. At the very least, we should be able to spare an hour to listen to our President. Clearly we have enthusiasm enough to vehemently oppose conservative speech like the Tory.

But we cannot claim to have better, more informed opinions if we refuse to pay attention to what is going on outside our university.

Even if the President speaks in alternative facts, our ability to recognize and correct them is a powerful tool in spreading the truth. Civic duty aside, we should harness the power that our position grants us, the power to speak up for those who cannot.

Now, looking back on the night I threw away the Tory, I realize how many missed opportunities I have let pass, even at Princeton, to meaningfully contribute rather

associate chief copy editors Caroline Lippman ’19 Megan Laubach ’18 editorial board co-chairs Ashley Reed ‘18 Connor Pfeiffer ’18 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ‘19

NIGHT STAFF 3.27.17 copy Alex Wilson ’20 Abigail Denton ’20 Savannah McIntosh ’20 Alia Wood ’20

than allow my own political insularity to detract from spreading meaningful discourse on campus.

I could have started by watching Trump’s speech. Even simply writing an article summarizing what he said might have had the potential to incite a grassroots chain reaction of informed and motivated students. By spreading information, whether through writing, or art, or even the content we learn about in our courses, we can take opposition not only to Trump as a person, but also to the specific ways in which his actions affect us, our peers, our community and our country. This is the kind of unified support that the anti-Trump camp needs to create on our campus in order to effect change in the current political dynamic in our country.

Hayley Siegel is a freshman from Princeton, N.J. She can be reached at hsiegel@princeton.edu.

Tuesday March 28, 2017

U. funds make up large part of township budget CPUC

Continued from page 1

.............

Film Festival will be showing films on campus in addition to at the public library, according to Bonfield.

Furthermore, University student volunteers offer afterschool homework help daily at the public library. To offset the sparse scheduling of inperson tutoring, the library created a program called Brainfuse, utilizing an online learning site.

Another ongoing partnership between the University and the town enables community members to audit any of 150 classes, according to Bob Pollack, a community member. He said that his friend, a former Princeton Township community member, failed in trying to extend this program to Harvard and MIT. Following the discussion of the University’s relationship with the town, the meeting

The Daily Princetonian

page 3

moved to cover divestment from private prisons in the University’s endowment PRINCO — a topic the CPUC Resources Committee has discussed over the last two years, according to the committee’s chair Michael Littman. At around 5:45 p.m., members of PPPD walked out of the meeting chanting in support of divestment.

University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 noted at the CPUC meeting that the University is not directly invested in private prisons through its endowment, nor does it plan to be in the future — a statement that had not been articulated previously, due to the University’s reluctance to discuss its endowment investments. Eisgruber has not released the University’s endowment portfolio, however.

The meeting took place in Friend Center 101 at 4:30 p.m. on Mar. 27.

PAJ petition encourages U. to join Every Campus a Refuge network PAJ

Continued from page 1

.............

ya from entering the U.S. for 90 days and bars all refugees from coming into the country for 120 days.

Ramzie Fathy ’20, a PAJ organizer and co-president of Princeton Muslim Advocates for Social Justice and Individual Dignity, explained that Eisgruber’s condemnation of Trump’s first immigration executive order is not sufficient.

“It’s important that the University shows a continued interest in the people it’s supposed to represent,” Fathy said. “Just because it did so once doesn’t mean it can stop in the future.”

Fathy also noted that if the University joined the “Every Campus a Refuge” network, it would show a tangible commitment, and that a condemnation from Eisgruber would lead to change.

“The University has an influence many people aren’t aware of on the national and global scale, so I’m optimistic that University action could change something,” he said. “Our motto calls the University to be open to everyone.”

University Religion professor Jonathan Gold, who signed the PAJ petition, argued that the University’s identity as a liberal arts institution requires political action.

“The petition expresses what a lot of people are feeling: that the liberal arts are about freedom of thought and conscience, diversity and human

rights, and we should champion those values,” Gold said.

“There aren’t many institutions that seem to be able to champion theses values, and I think President Eisgruber is doing a good job in that way.”

He acknowledged that Eisgruber’s words would not be a magic bullet in the political landscape, and argued that he will likely face a continuing battle.

“I’m hopeful that we do have some effect, not just in the day-to-day political competitive arena, but in providing knowledge and support for our values in general,” Gold noted.

“There’s not an easy endpoint — the new travel plan is just as much directed as Muslims, just cleaned up a little bit, so I don’t think anything should be accepted as solved.”

“The ban is inherently exclusionary, targeting Muslims based on myths and misconceptions surrounding the religion of Islam. It is important for Eisgruber, as the President and a representative of the University, to show that institutes of higher education reject this policy and stand with those unjustly discriminated against because of their religion or nationality,” said Matt Błaż ejewski ‘17.

In mid-April, PAJ plans to travel to Washington, D.C., to directly lobby members of Congress and their staff. The group is currently ascertaining what political issues to focus on and plans to split into task forces to specifically target members of Congress.

Falk lectures banned in UK due to controversial remarks about Israel FALK

Continued from page 1

.............

comments last week. In a letter to UK Prime Minister Theresa May, the organization states that Falk has been officially denounced by the UK three times for anti-Semitism. The letter notes further that Falk published an anti-Semitic cartoon in 2011 and provided “the cover endorsement of a virulently anti-Semitic book that describes Jews as Nazis, and which asks whether ‘Hitler might have been right after all.’”

Falk described his treatment in the UK as endemic of the trend of restricting academic freedom on university cam-

puses, noting that those calling him “anti-Semitic” are missing the point.

“As far as I can tell, there is a growing kind of feeling that the educational establishment in Britain, specifically in England, has been kind of intimidated in dealing with those who are seen as critics of Israel,” he explained in an op-ed in the Middle East Eye. “What is disturbing about my experience is not only the personal loss of opportunities to discuss my views on Palestine and bringing a sustainable peace to both peoples, but also the adverse institutional consequences of silencing discussion of controversial issues of wider public interest.”

Sports

Tuesday March 28, 2017

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Women’s softball plays hardball in TX, CA

By Jack Graham contributor

Since the beginning of its season on May 3, the Princeton women’s softball team has worked through a hectic schedule, playing 18 games over the course of just three weeks. Disadvantaged with less practice and game experience than many of its early opponents, the team began its season slowly, but has responded in strong fashion to post a 7-11 overall record as of March 26. This weekend, the team will transition into Ivy League play, beginning with a pair of home doubleheaders against Brown and Yale.

The non-conference schedule for the Tigers has consisted of a series of tournaments, forcing the team to travel to Texas, California, and New York. First for the team was the Houston Hilton Plaza Classic. Princeton’s tournament and season here began unspectacularly — the team absorbed three losses of 10 or more runs in its first three games against Louisiana-Monroe, Houston, and Wisconsin. The team would rebound, however, to win its first game against Sam Houston State to conclude the tournament.

Over spring break, Princeton travelled to California for a week

of games against West Coast opponents. The team split its matchups over the first weekend, with wins against North Dakota and St. Mary’s and a pair of losses against U.C. Davis. The following week, however, the team would continue to struggle against teams with far more game experience, dropping five out of its six matchups. Its lone win came 3-0 against St. Mary’s in a game highlighted by senior Claire Klausner’s shutout pitching performance.

Finally, the team found sustained success at the LIU tournament on March 25 and 26, winning three out of four games during a pair of doubleheaders against Long Island and Binghamton.

Statistically, the team has been led by the offensive juggernaut of senior outfielder Marissa Reynolds. She leads the team in a variety of categories, from batting average (.471) and on base percentage (.600), to slugging percentage (.971) and home runs (3). The team has also benefitted from the immediate impact of freshman infielder Allison Harvey, who is tied for the team lead in RBIs with 10, and is second in hits with 17.

Sophomore Kaitlyn Waslawski has meanwhile made her presence known on the base paths, logging 7 steals. Princeton’s pitching staff has also been an-

COURTESY OF TIFFANY RICHARDSON

Women’s softball traveled to California over spring break to compete in a number of competitive matchups.

chored by the senior duo of Erica Nori and Claire Klausner, who have combined to pitch over half of possible innings. Nori has been particularly impressive, posting a record of 3-1 with a team-leading ERA of 3.63.

At the beginning of the year, the Tigers set their sights on defending their Ivy League title and returning to the NCAA Tournament. The path there begins this weekend, as the team seeks to get out to a fast start in confer-

ence play. As the significance of its games increases dramatically, the Tigers must hope that the experiences they have obtained in non-conference play will prove helpful to the matchups ahead.

Men’s baseball splits series with Navy

By David Xin Head Sports Editor

COURTESY OF HEATHER GRACE

Men’s baseball won two and lost two in this past weekend’s four-game series against Navy.

The men’s baseball team split their four-game series against Navy this past weekend. While the team lost its first encounter, the Tigers bounced back to snatch the next two games, operating behind stellar pitching from junior Ben Gross and freshman James Proctor. However, the Tigers were unable to clinch the series as Navy edged out the Tigers in a tight closing match.

Last year, the Tigers carried out a dream season. The 2016 Princeton squad saw themselves rise from 7-32 overall and

4-16 in the Ancient Eight to Ivy League Champions. They also earned a coveted NCAA spot that year.

This year, the Tigers undoubtedly hope to recreate the magic of last season. While the team has had a rough start, having yet to win a series, the Tigers are hopeful that their season will turn around. Indeed, the 2016 squad also struggled before finding their groove in conference play.

The Tigers have managed to keep the core of their team this season, returning five of the seven all-conference players from last year. This includes senior Chad Powers, who has

unanimously been named Ivy League Pitcher of the Year.

However, the Tigers will undoubtedly be missing their former infielder Danny Hoy, who left Princeton in the top ten of the Ivy League in terms of runs, hits, doubles, home runs, RBI, and total runs.

The Princeton team will continue their season this Wednesday with a match against Seton Hall. This will be the last nonconference game before the Tigers start conference play.

The Orange and Black will next open the Ivy League season with a weekend doubleheader against the Yale Bulldogs and the Brown Bears.

Alumni representative: In the service of humanity we must divest PPPD

Continued from page 1

.............

are now off the table, as far as I understand,” Littman noted.

Before turning the podium over to PPPD, however, Littman added that the issue remains “under active consideration.”

A spokeperson for PPPD responded next. “Make no mistake, the decision that was just communicated to all of you sitting here was a rejection of the movement that many of you in the crowd have been working on and contributing to for the past year,” the spaker noted. “I don’t know what President Eisgruber is talking about when he says we’re not invested in private prison companies, because that is a question we’ve been asking the Resources Committee for over a year.”

“What is going on in this room right now is a charade,” the speaker, a student representative on the Resources Committee in the last academic year, continued. “[The committee’s actions] are entirely consistent with the tactics of this University in countering student protests more generally. They include delaying, being unpredictable, obstructing, not following their own procedures.”

Another PPPD speaker said that the student body has shown considerable support for divestment.

In an April 16 referendum presented to the undergraduate student body by the University Student Government, 89 percent of respondents, or 1,457 students, voted for divestment from private prisons, with a turnout of 1,639 students, or 30.1 percent of the undergraduate student body. 85 percent of voting graduate students also supported divestment. In addition, PPPD circulated a faculty petition which garnered approximately 180 signatures.

The speaker added that the Resources Committee’s concern about a lack of empirical evidence in their proposal is “a very flimsy argument for a number of reasons.”

“We have never been able to engage substantively with the Resources Committee on the actual evidence that we’ve brought to the table, and have instead been repeatedly … dealt with in a condescending way,” he said.

“The point is that throughout this past year the Resources Committee has been intentionally vague about the empirical standards that we need to meet because they know that if they are specific we’ll satisfy them.” he

Tweet of the Day Some nice hardware arrived!

Princeton Wrestling (@tigerwrestling), wrestling

added.

“After the past years of evasions and delay tactics, we have taken the stage to say this movement is not over and it will not be stopped,” another PPPD spokesperson said. “To this end, we refuse to discuss this issue any further with the Resources Committee.”

The spokesperson also encouraged faculty members to “follow through on President Eisgruber’s ... decision to support DACA students” and was met with snaps from the audience.

“Princeton was years late in divesting from apartheid South Africa and Darfur,” she added. “History remembers this mistake and will remember this one.”

PPPD then stated its demands: University divestment from private prisons and detention corporations or the provision of proof that it is not invested in these companies; increased accountability and transparency from the Resources Committee; and an immediate meeting with the Board of Trustees to discuss divestment.

Rather than continue with the scheduled question-and-answer session, PPPD held a walkout from the meeting, as students chanted: “What do we want? Divestment.

When do we want it? Now.”

The group then held a rally in the lobby of Friend Center, directly outside the meeting. Members of various student groups, as well as faculty members and professionals, addressed the crowd.

“We are facing a revolution, because we have to put it in those terms,” said Serges Demefack, an employee of the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization with a mission of peace and social justice.

Several graduate students also expressed their support for the group and stressed the high turnout among graduate students in the Graduate Student Government election, which included a referendum on divestment.

“We’re not just calling for divestments because we want to divest from prisons,” said Heath Pearson, a graduate student in the Department of Anthropology and Department of African Americans Studies. “We’re calling for divestment because we want to abolish prisons.”

“The prison system is modern iteration of slavery by this corporate state,” said journalist and University Professor Chris Hedges. “Prisoners not only go into prison owing thousands of dollars, but fines are imposed upon them so they leave owing thou-

Stat of the Day

1,148 points Number of career points scored by senior Steven Cook on the Men’s Basketball Team

sands of dollars.

“The only way we will break this system of neo-slavery is to break the possibility for profit,” he added. “The only way we are going to break this now is by not cooperating.”

New Jersey attorney Jean Ross, who works with incarcerated people, talked about the lack of communication that prisoners have with their family members due to the profit-making structure of the mailing system.

“If you’re a prisoner in a New Jersey facility or county jail, your ability to communicate with families and loved ones depends on your money,” she said.

“In the service of humanity we must divest,” an alumni representative read from a statement signed by over 250 alumni.

PPPD is a coalition consisting of Students for Prison Education and Reform, the DREAM Team, the Muslim Advocates for Social Justice and Individual Dignity, the Alliance for Jewish Progressives, the Black Justice League, the Princeton University Latinx Perspectives Organization, Progressive Christians at Princeton, and the Princeton College Democrats.

The CPUC meeting was held at 4:30 p.m. in 101 Friend Center on March 27.

Follow us Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!